
















































































* ^ 










V 



t 




























» 




\ 



Amending Sections 2,13, and 14 of the 
Seamen’s Act 


HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON THE 
MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
FIRST SESSION 


H. R. 3716 


MAY 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, 1921 



48420 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1921 





1 



<1 

Amending Sections 2,13, and 14 of the 
Seamen’s Act 


HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 

V . - . s Ao COMMITTEE ON THE 

MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES, 


HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
FIRST SESSION 

ON 

H. R. 3716 


MAY 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, 1921 


1 

✓T* 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

48420 


c o\o\j Z. 






fill SD3^ 

.3*2. Uu 
D zi 



COMMITTEE ON THE MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES. 


House of Representatives. 

SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS. 


WILLIAM S. GREENE, Massachusetts, Chairman. 


GEORGE W. EDMONDS, Pennsylvania. 

FRANK D. SCOTT, Michigan. 

WALLACE H. WHITE, Jr., Maine. 
FREDERICK R. LEHLBACH, New Jersey. 
EDWIN D. RICKETTS, Ohio. 

CARL R. CHINDBLOM, Illinois. 

ALBERT W. JEFFERIS, Nebraska. 

NATHAN D. PERLMAN, New York. 
BENJAMIN L. ROSENBLOOM, West Virginia. 
HARRY C. GAHN, Ohio. 

ARTHUR M. FREE, California. 

WILLIAM H. KIRKPATRICK, Pennsylvania. 
OGDEN L. MILLS, New York. 


RUFUS HARDY, Texas. 

LADISLAS LAZARO, Louisiana. 
WILLIAM B. BANKHEAD, Alabama. 
EWIN L. DAVIS, Tennessee. 

THOMAS H. CULLEN, New York. 
SCHUYLER OTIS BLAND, Virginia. 
CLAY STONE BRIGGS, Texas. 



Uene G. de Tonnancour, Clerk. 


library of congress 

received 

AUG 2 5 1924 


DOCUMENTS PtVfStQM 







AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT 


Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Washington, D. CMonday , May 2,1921. 

The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. William S. Greene 
(chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. The committee has before it the bill introduced 
by Mr. Scott, H. R. 3716, to amend the seamen’s act, which can be 
incorporated in the record at this point. 

(The bill is as follows:) 

fH. R. 3716, 67th Cong., 1st sess.] 

A IVILL To amend sections 2, 13, and 14 of an act entitled “An act to promote the 
welfare of American seamen in the merchant marine of the United States ; to abolish 
arrest and imprisonment as a penalty for desertion, and to secure the abrogation of 
treaty provisions in relation thereto ; and to promote safety at sea,’’ approved March 
4, 1915. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That sections 2. 13, and 14 of an act 
entitled “An act to promote tlie welfare of American seamen in the merchant 
marine of the United States ; to abolish arrest and imprisonment as a penalty 
for desertion, and to secure tlie abrogation of treaty provisions in relation 
thereto; and to promote safety at sea,” approved March 4, 1915, be, and the 
same are hereby, amended as follows: 

Sec. 2. That section 2 of the said act be amended to read as follows: 

“ Sec. 2. That in all merchant vessels of the United States of more than 100 
tons gro^s, where the continuous run is 16 hours or more, excepting those navi¬ 
gating rivers, harbors, bays, or sounds, exclusively, the sailors, oilers, and 
water tenders shall, while at sea, be divided into at least two watches and the 
firemen into at least three watches, which shall be' kept on duty successively 
for the performance of ordinary work incident to the sailing and management of 
the vessel: Provided, That all merchant vessels of the United States of more 
than 100 tons gross, where the continuous run is more than 8 hours and less 
then 16 hours, excepting those navigating rivers, harbors, bays, or sounds, ex¬ 
clusively, the sailors, oilers, water tenders, and firemen shall, while at sea, be 
divided into at least two watches, which shall be kept on duty successively for 
the performance of ordinary work incident to the sailing and management of 
the vessel. The seamen shall not be shipped to work alternately in the fire- 
room and on deck, nor shall those shipped for deck duty be required to work in 
the fireroom, or vice versa, but these provisions shall not limit either the au¬ 
thority of the master or other officer or the obedience of the seamen when, in 
the judgment of the master or other officer, the whole or any' part of the crew 
are needed for the maneuvering of the vessel or the performance of work 
necessary for the safety of the vessel or her cargo, or for the saving of life 
aboard other vessels in jeopardy, or when in port or at sea from requiring the 
whole or any part of the crew to participate in the performance of fire, life¬ 
boat, and other drills. While such vessel is in a safe harbor no seaman shall 
be required to do any unnecessary work on Sundays or the following-named 
days: New Year’s Day, the Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and 
Christmas Day, but this shall not prevent the dispatch of a vessel on regular 
schedule or when ready to proceed on her voyage. And at all times while such 

3 



4 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


vessel is in a safe habor, nine hours, inclusive of the anchor watch, shali con¬ 
stitute a day’s work. Whenever the master of any vessel shall fail to comply 
with this section, the seamen shall be entitled to discharge from such vessel 
and to receive the wages earned. But this section shall not apply to fishing 
or whaling vessels or yachts.” 

Sec. 3. That section 13 of said act be amended as follows: 

“ Sec. 33. That no vessel of 100 tons gross and upward, except those navigat¬ 
ing rivers exclusively and the smaller inland lakes, and except as provided in 
section 1 of this act, shall be permitted to depart from any port of the United 
States unless she has on board a crew not less than 75 per cent of which, in 
each department thereof, are able to understand any order given by the officers 
of such vessel, nor unless 40 per cent in the first year, 45 per cent in the second 
year, 50 per cent in the third year. 55 per cent in the fourth year after the 
passage of this act, and thereafter 65 per cent of her deck crew, exclusive of 
licensed officers and apprentices, are of a rating not less than able seamen: 
Provided, That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters certificated 
lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen. Every person shall be rated 
an able seaman and qualified for service as such on the seas who is 19 years of 
age or upward and has had at least three years’ service on deck at sea or on 
the Great Lakes on a vessel, or vessels, to which this section applies, including 
decked fishing vessels, naval vessels, or Coast Guard vessels; and every person 
shall be rated an able seaman and qualified to serve as such on the Great Lakes 
and on the smaller lakes, bays, or sounds who is 19 years of age or upward and 
has had at least 18 months’ service on deck at sea or on the Great Lakes or on 
the smaller lakes, bays, or sounds, on a vessel or vessels to which this section 
applies, including decked fishing vessels, naval vessels, or Coast Guard vessels; 
ana graduates of sciiooi whips approved bv and conducted under the rules pre¬ 
scribed by the Secretary of Commerce may be rated able seamen after 
12 months’ service at sea: Provided further, That upon examination, under 
rules prescribed by the Department of Commerce, as to eyesight, hearing, and 
physical condition, such persons or graduates are found to be competent: Pro¬ 
vided further, That upon examination, under rules prescribed by the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce, as to eyesight, hearing, physical condition, and knowledge 
of the duties of seamanship, a person found competent may be rated as able 
seaman after having served on deck 12 months at sea or on the Great Lakes, 
but seamen examined and rated able seamen under this proviso shall not in any 
case compose more than one-fourth of the number of able seamen required by 
this section to be shipped or employed upon any vessel: And provided further, 
That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters certificated lifeboat men 
may be used in lieu of able seamen in the manning of lifeboats and life rafts. 

“Any person may make application to any board of local inspectors for a 
certificate of service as able seaman, and upon proof being made to said board 
by affidavit and examination, under rules approved by the Secretary of Com¬ 
merce, showing the nationality and age of the applicant and the vessel or vessels 
on which he has had sendee and that he is entitled to such certificate under 
the provisions of this section, the board of local inspectors shall issue to said 
applicant a certificate of service, which shall be retained by him and be accepted 
as prima facie evidence of his rating as an able seaman. 

“ Each board of local inspectors shall keep a complete record of all certificates 
of service issued by them and to whom issued, and shall keep on file the affi¬ 
davits upon which said certificates are issued. 

“ The collector of customs may, upon his own motion, and shall, upon the 
sworn information of any reputable citizen of the United States setting forth 
that this section is not being complied with, cause a muster of the crew of 
any vessel to be made to determine the fact; and no clearance shall be given 
to any vessel failing to comply with the provisions of this section: Provided, 
That the collector of customs shall not be required to cause such muster of 
the crew to be made unless said sworn information has been filed with him 
at least six hours before the vessel departs, or is scheduled to depart: Provided 
further, That any person that shall knowingly make a false affidavit for such 
purpose shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and upon conviction thereof shall be 
punished by a fine not exceeding $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding one 
year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, within the discretion of the court. 
Any violation of any provision of this section by the owner, master, or officer 
in charge of the vessel shall subject the owner of such vessel to a penalty of 
not less than $100 and not more than $500: And provided further, That' the 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


5 


Secretary of Commerce shall make such rules and regulations as may be neces¬ 
sary to carry out the provisions of this section, and nothing herein shall be held 
or construed to prevent the board of supervising inspectors, with the approval 
of the Secretary of Commerce, from making rules and regulations authorized 
by law as to vessels excluded from the operation of this section.” 

Sec. 4. That the paragraph under section 14 of said act with reference to 
life boat and raft requirements for passenger vessels operating on the Great 
Lakes be amended to read as follows: 

“At no moment of its voyage may any passenger steam vessel of the United 
States on the Great Lakes, on routes more than 3 miles offshore, except over 
waters whose depth is not sufficient to submerge all the decks of the vessel, 
have on board a total number of persons, including passengers and crew, 
greater than that for whom accommodation is provided in lifeboats and pontoon 
liferafts on board. The accommodation provided in lifeboats shall in every case 
be sufficient to accommodate at least 50 per cent of the persons on board. The 
number and type of such lifeboats and liferafts shall be determined by regula¬ 
tions of the Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary of 
Commerce: Provided, That during the interval from May 1 to October 15, in¬ 
clusive, any such steamer on routes more than 3 miles offshore, but not more 
than 30 miles offshore, except over waters whose depth is not sufficient to sub¬ 
merge all the decks of the vessel, shall be required to carry accommodation for 
not less than 25 per cent of persons on board in lifeboats and pontoon liferafts, 
«f which accommodation not less than two-tifths shall be in lifeboats and three- 
fifths may be in collapsible boats or rafts under regulations of the Board of 
Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce: Provided 
;further , That during the interval from May 1 to October 15, inclusive, any such 
steamer on routes more than 10 miles offshore, except over waters whose depth 
is not sufficient to submerge all the decks of the vessel, shall be required to 
carry accommodation for not less than 50 per cent of persons on board, in life¬ 
boats and pontoon rafts, of which accommodation not less than two-fifths shall 
be in lifeboats and three-fifths may be in collapsible boats or rafts, under regu¬ 
lations of the Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary of 
Commerce: And provided further, That all passenger steam vessels of the 
United States, the keels of which are laid after the 1st of July, 1915, for service 
on ocean routes, or for service from October 15 to May 1 on the Great Lakes 
on routes more than 3 miles offshore, shall be built to carry, and shall carry, 
enough lifeboats and liferafts to accommodate all persons on board, including 
passengers and crew: And provided further, That not more than 25 per cent of 
such equipment may be in pontoon liferafts or collapsible lifeboats.” 

Sec. 5. That the paragraph of section 14 of said act under the caption, 
“ Certificated lifeboat men—manning of the boats,” be amended to read as 
follows: 

“ There shall be for each boat or raft a number of lifeboat men at least 
equal to that specified as follows: If the boat or raft carries 25 persons or 
less, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 1; if the boat 
or raft carries 26 persons or less than 41 persons, the minimum number of 
certificated lifeboat men shall be 2; if the boat or raft carries 41 persons and 
less than 61 persons, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall 
be 3; if the boat or raft carries from 61 to 85 persons, the minimum number 
of certificated lifeboat men shall be four; if the boat or raft carries from 86 
to 110 persons, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 5; 
if the boat or raft carries from 131 to 160 persons, the minimum number of 
certificated lifeboat men shall be 6: if the boat or raft carries from 161 to 
210 persons, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 7; and, 
thereafter, one additional certificated lifeboat man for each additional 50 per¬ 
sons: Provided, That if the raft carries 15 persons or less, a licensed officer, 
able seaman, or certificated lifeboat man need not be placed in charge of such 
raft: Provided further, That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters, 
rafts carried need not have a capacity of exceeding 15 persons. 

“The allocation of the able seamen or certificated lifeboat men to each 
boat and raft remains within the discretion of the master, according to the 
circumstances. 

“ By ‘ certificated lifeboat man ’ is meant any member of the crew who holds 
a certificate of efficiency issued under the authority of the Secretary of 
Commerce, who is hereby directed to provide for the issue of such certificates. 

“ In order to obtain the special lifeboat man’s certificate, the applicant must 
prove to the satisfaction of an officer designated by the Secretary of Com- 


6 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 

merce that lie has been trained in all the operations connected with the launch¬ 
ing of lifeboats and the use of oars; that he is acquainted with the practical 
handling of the boats themselves; and, further, that he is capable of under¬ 
standing and answering the orders relative to lifeboat service. 

“ Section 4463 of the Revised Statutes as amended is hereby amended by 
adding the words ‘ including certificated lifeboat men, separately stated,’ to the 
word ‘ crew ’ wherever it occurs.” 

Sec. 6. That the paragraph of section 14 under the caption, “ Manning of 
boats,” be amended to read as follows: 

“A licensed officer, able seaman, or certificated lifeboat man shall be placed 
in charge of each boat or pontoon raft; he shall have a list of its lifeboat men 
and other members of its crew which shall be sufficient for its safe manage¬ 
ment, and shall see that the men placed under his orders are acquainted with 
their several duties and stations. 

“A man capable of working the motors shall be assigned to each motor boat. 

“ The duty of seeing that the boats, pontoon rafts, and other life-saving 
appliances at all times are ready for use shall be assigned to one or more 
officers.” 

The Chairman. In order that we may understand the bill fully, 
it would be well to incorporate here the seamen’s act as amended. 
(The seamen’s act is here printed in full, as follows:) 

SEAMEN’S ACT AS AMENDED. 

LPublic—N o. 302—63 d Congress.] 

[S. 136.] 

AN ACT To promote the welfare of American seamen in the merchant marine 

of the United States; to abolish arrest and imprisonment a# a penalty for 

desertion and to secure the abrogation of treaty provisions in relation thereto; 

and to promote safety at sea. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and Rouse of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, That section 4516 of the Revised Statutes of 
the United States be, and is hereby, amended to read as follows; 

” Sec. 4516. In case of desertion or casualty resulting in the loss of one or 
more of the seamen, the master must ship, if obtainable, a number equal to the 
number of those whose services he has been deprived of by desertion or casualty, 
who must be of the same or higher grade or rating with those whose places they 
fill, and report the same to the United States consul at the first port at which he 
shall arrive, without incurring the penalty prescribed by the two preceding 
sections. This section shall not apply to fishing or whaling vessels or yachts.” 

Sec. 2. That in all merchant vessels of the United States of more than 100 
tons gross, excepting those navigating rivers, harbors, bays, or sounds exclu¬ 
sively, the sailors shall, while at sea, be divided into at least two, and the 
firemen, oilers, and water tenders into at least three watches, which shall be 
kept on duty succesively for the performance of ordinary work incident to the 
sailing and management of the vessel. The seamen shall not be shipped to work 
alternately in the fireroom and on deck, nor shall those shipped for de k duty 
be required to work in the fireroom, or vice versa; but these provisions shall 
not limit either the authority of the master or other officer or the obedience of 
the seamen when, in the judgment of the master or other officer, the whole or 
any part of the crew are needed for the maneuvering of the vessel or the per¬ 
formance of work necessary for the safety of the vessel or her cargo, or for the 
saving of life aboard other vessels in jeopardy, or when in port or at sea from 
requiring the whole or any part of the crew to participate in the performance 
of fire, lifeboat, and other drills. While such vessel is in a safe harbor no 
seaman shall be required to do any unnecessary work on Sundays or the fol¬ 
lowing-named days: New Year’s Day, the Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanks¬ 
giving Day, and Christmas Day, but this shall not prevent the dispatch of a 
vessel on regular schedule or when ready to proceed on her voyage. And at 
all times while such vessel is in a safe harbor, nine hours, inclusive of the 
anchor watch, shall constitute a day’s work. Whenever the master of any vessel 
shall fail to comply with this section the seamen shall be entitled to discharge 
from such vessel and to receive the wages earned. But this section shall not 
apply to fishing or whaling vessels or yachts. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 


2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN \s 


ACT. 


7 


nnTw 0t ’ the Revisecl Statutes of the United States he, 

and is hereby, amended to read as follows: 

ST:('. 4o29. The master or owner of any vessel making coasting voyages shall 
pay to every seaman his wages within two days after the termination of the 
‘foment 1 l ! D ? er wll * c41 lie was shipped, or at the time such seaman is dis¬ 
charged, whichever first happens; and in case of vessels making foreign voy- 
ages, or from a port on the Atlantic to a port on the Pacific, or vice versa, 
w tlmi -4 hours after the cargo has been discharged, or within four days after 
tiie seaman has been dischaged, whichever first happens; and in all cases the 
si a man shall be entitled to be paid at the time of his discharge on account of 
wages a sum equal to one-tliird part of the balance due him. Every master or 
owner who refuses or neglects to make payment in the manner hereinbefore 
mentioned without sufficient cause shall pay to the seaman a sum equal to two 
days pay for each and every day during which payment is delayed beyond the 
respective periods, which sum shall be recoverable as wages in any claim made 
before the court; but this section shall not apply to masters or owners of any 
vessel the seamen of which are entitled to share in the profits of the cruise or 
voyage.” 

Sec. 4. That section 4530 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and 
is hereby, amended to read as follows: 


“ Sec - 4530 - Every seaman on a vessel of the United States shall be entitled 
to receive on demand from the master of the vessel to which he belongs one- 
Jhalf part of the wages which he shall have then earned at every port where 
such vessel, after the voyage has been commenced, shall load or deliver cargo 
before the voyage is ended and all stipulations in the contract to the contrary 
shall be void: Provided, Such a demand shall not be made before the expira¬ 
tion of nor oftener than once in five days. Any failure on the part of the master 
to comply with this demand shall release the seaman from his contract, and he 
shall be entitled to full payment of wages earned. And when the voyage is 
ended every such seaman shall be entitled to the remainder of the wages which 
shall then be due him, as provided by section 4529 of the Revised Statutes: 
Provided f urther, That notwithstanding any release signed by any seaman under 
section 4552 of the Revised Statutes any court having jurisdiction may upon 
good cause shown set aside such release and take such action as justice shall 
require: And provided further, That this section shall apply to seamen on for- 
e’gn vessels while in harbors of the United States, and the courts of the United 
States shall be open to such seamen for its enforcement.” 

Sec. 5. That section 4559 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and 
is hereby, amended to read as follows: 

“ Sec. 4559. Upon a complaint in writing, signed by the first and second offi¬ 
cers or a majority of the crew of any vessel, while in a foreign port, that such 
vessel is in an unsuitable condition to go to sea because she is leaky or insuffi¬ 
ciently supplied with sails, rigging, anchors, or any other equipment, or that 
the crew is insufficient to man her, or that her provisions, stores, and supplies 
are not or have not been during the voyage sufficient or wholesome, thereupon, 
in any of these or like cases the consul or a commercial agent who may dis¬ 
charge any of the duties of a consul shall cause to be appointed three persons 
of like qualifications with those described in section 4557, who shall proceed to 
examine into the cause of complaint and who shall proceed and be governed in 
all their proceedings as provided by said section.” 

Sec. 6. That section 2 of the act entitled “An act to amend the laws relating 
to navigation,” approved March 3, 1897, be, and is hereby, amended to read as 
follows: 

“ Sec. 2. That on all merchant vessels of the Un ted States the construction 
of which shall be begun after the passage of this act, except yachts, pilot boats, 
or vessels of less than 100 tons register, every place appropriated to the crew 
of the vessel shall have a space of not less than 120 cubic feet and not less than 
16 square feet, measured on the floor or deck of that place, for each seaman or 
apprentice lodged therein, and each seaman shall have a separate berth and 
not more than one berth shall be placed one above another; such place or 
lodging shall be securely constructed, properly lighted, drained, heated, and 
ventilated, properly protected from weather and sea, and, as far as practicable, 
properly shut oft' and protected from the effluvium of cargo or bilge water. 
And every such crew space shall be kept free from goods or stores not being 
the personal property of the crew occupying said place in use during the 
voyage. 


8 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

“ That in addition to the space allotment for lodgings hereinbefore provided, 
on all merchant vessels of the United States which in the ordinary course of 
their trade make voyages of more than three days’ duration between ports, and 
which carry a crew of twelve or more seamen, there shall be constructed a 
compartment, suitably separated from other spaces, for hospital purposes, and 
such compartment shall have at least one bunk for every 12 seamen, con¬ 
stituting her crew, provided that not more than six bunks shall be required 
in any case. 

“Every steamboat of the United States plying upon the Mississippi River 
or its tributaries shall furnish an appropriate place for the crew, which shall 
conform to the requirements of this section, so far as they are applicable 
thereto, by providing sleeping room in the engine room for such steamboat, 
properly protected from the cold, wind, and rain by means of suitable awnings 
or screens on either side of the guards or sides and forward, reaching from 
the boiler deck to the lower or main deck, under the direction and approval 
of the Supervising Inspector General of Steam Vessels, and shall be properly 
heated. 

“ All merchant vessels of the United States, the construction of which shall 
be begun after the passage of this act having more than 10 men on deck must 
have at least one light, clean, and properly ventilated washing place. There 
shall be provided at least one washing outfit for every two men of the watch. 
The washing place shall be properly heated. A separate washing place shall 
be provided for the fireroom and engine-room men, if their number exceed 10, 
which shall be large enough to accommodate at least one-sixth of them at the 
same time, and have hot and cold water supply and a sufficient number of wash 
basins, sinks, and shower baths. 

“Any failure to comply with this section shall subject the owner or owners 
of such vessel to a penalty of not less than $50 nor more than $500: Provided, 
That forecastles shall be fumigated at such intervals as may be provided by 
regulations to be issued by the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service, 
with the approval of the Department of Commerce, and shall have at least 
two exits, one of which may be used in emergencies.” 

Sec. 7. That section 4596 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, 
and is hereby, amended to read as follows: 

“ Sec. 4596. Whenever any seaman who has been lawfully engaged or any 
apprentice to the sea service commits any of the following offenses he shall 
be punished as follows : 

“ First. For desertion, by forfeiture of all or any part of the clothes or ef¬ 
fects he leaves on board and of all or any part of the wages or emoluments 
which he has then earned. 

“ Second. For neglecting or refusing without reasonable cause to join his 
vessel or to proceed to sea in his vessel, or for absence without leave at any time 
within 24 hours of the vessel’s sailing from any port, either at the commence¬ 
ment or during the progress of the voyage, or for absence at any time without 
leave and without sufficient reason from his vessel and from his duty, not 
amounting to desertion, by forfeiture from his wages of not more than two 
days’ pay or sufficient to defray any expenses which shall have been properly 
incurred in hiring a substitute. 

“ Third. For quitting the vessel without leave, after her arrival at the port 
of her delivery and before she is placed in security, by forfeiture from his 
wages of not more than one month’s pay. 

“ Fourth. For willful disobedience tb any lawful command at sea, by being, 
at the option of the master, placed in irons until such disobedience shall cease, 
and upon arrival in port by forfeiture from his wages of not more than four 
days’ pay, or, at the discretion of the court, by imprisonment for not more than 
one month. 

“ Fifth. For continued willful disobedience to lawful command or continued 
willful neglect of duty at sea, by being, at the option of the master, placed in 
irons, on bread and water, with full rations every fifth day, until such disobedi¬ 
ence shall cease, and upon arrival in port by forfeiture, for every 24 hours’ con¬ 
tinuance of such disobedience or neglect, of a sum of not more than 12 days’ 
pay, or by imprisonment for not more than three months, at the discretion of 
the court. 

“ Sixth. For assaultihg any master or mate, by imprisonment for not more 
than two years. 

“ Seventh. For willfully damaging the vessel, or embezzling or willfully dam¬ 
aging any of the stores or cargo, by forfeiture out of his wages of a sum equal 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ^S ACT. 9 


in amount to the loss thereby sustained, and also, at the discretion of the court, 
by imprisonment for not more than 12 months. 

“ Eighth. For any act of smuggling for which he is convicted and whereby 
loss or damage is occasioned to the master or owner, he shall be liable to pay 
such master or owner such a sum as is sufficient to reimburse the master or 
owner for such loss or damage, and the whole or any part of his wages may be 
retained in satisfaction or on account of such liability, and he shall be liable to 
imprisonment for a period of not more than 12 months.” 

Sec. 8. That section 4600 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and 
is hereby, amended to read as follows: 

“ Sec. 4600. It shall be the duty of all consular officers to discountenance in¬ 
subordination by every means in their power and, where the local authorities 
can be usefully employed for that purpose, to lend their aid and use their 
exertions to that end in the most effectual manner. In all cases where seamen 
or officers are accused, the consular officer shall inquire into the facts and pro¬ 
ceed as provided in section 4583 of the Revised Statutes ; and the officer discharg¬ 
ing such seaman shall enter upon the crew list and shipping articles and official 
log the cause of such discharge and the particulars in which the cruel or unusual 
treatment consisted and subscribe his name thereto officially. He shall read the 
entry made in the official log to the master, and his reply thereto, if any, shall 
likewise be entered and subscribed in the same manner.” 

Sec. 9. That section 4,611 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, 
and is hereby, amended to read as follows: 

“ Sec. 4611. Flogging and all other forms of corporal punishment are hereby 
prohibited on board of any vessel, and no form of corporal punishment on 
board of any vessel shall be deemed justifiable, and any master or other officer 
thereof who shall violate the aforesaid provisions of this section, or either 
thereof, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment 
for not less than three months nor more than two years. Whenever any officer 
other than the master of such vessel shall violate any provision of this section, 
it shall be the duty of such master to surrender such officer to the proper 
authorities as soon as practicable, provided he has actual knowledge of the 
misdemeanor, or complaint thereof is made within three days after reaching 
port. Any failure on the part of such master to use due diligence to comply 
herewith, which failure shall result in the escape of such officer, shall render 
the master or vessel or the owner of the vessel liable in damages for such 
flogging or corporal punishment to the person illegally punished by such 
officer.” 

Sec. 10. That section 23 of the act entitled “An act to amend the laws relat¬ 
ing to American seamen, for the protection of such seamen, and to promote 
commerce.” approved December 21, 1898, be, and is hereby, amended as regards 
the items of water and butter, so that in lieu of a daily requirement of 4 
quarts of water there shall be a requirement of 5 quarts of water every day, 
and in lieu of a daily requirement of 1 ounce of butter there shall be a re¬ 
quirement of 2 ounces of butter every day. 

Sec. 11. That section 24 of the act entitled “An act to amend the laws 
relating to American seamen, for the protection of such seamen, and to pro¬ 
mote commerce,” approved December 21, 1898, be, and is hereby, amended to 
read as follows: 

“ Sec. 24. That section 10 of chapter 121 of the laws of 1884, as amended by 
section 3 of chapter 421 of the laws of 1886 be, and is hereby, amended to read 
as follows: 

“‘Sec. 10 (a) That it shall be, and is hereby, made unlawful in any case 
to pay any seaman wages in advance of the time when he has actually earned 
the same, or to pay such advance wages, or to make any order, or note, or other 
evidence of indebtedness therefor to any other person, or to pay any person, for 
the shipment of seamen when payment is deducted or to be deducted from a 
seaman’s wages. Any person violating any of the foregoing provisions of this 
section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall 
be punished by a fine of not less than $25 nor more than $100, and may also 
be imprisoned for a period of not exceeding six months, at the discretion of 
the court. The payment of such advance wages or allotment shall in no case 
except as herein provided absolve the vessel or the master or the owner thereof 
from the full payment of wages after the same shall have been actually 
earned, and shall be no defense to a libel suit or action for the recovery of 
such wages. If any person shall demand or receive, either directly or indi¬ 
rectly, from any seaman or other person seeking employment, as seaman, or 


10 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN S ACT. 

from any person on bis behalf, any remuneration whatever for providing him 
with employment, he shall for every such offense be deemed guilty of a mis¬ 
demeanor and shall be imprisoned not more than six months or fined not more 
than $500. 

“‘(b) That it shall be lawful for any seaman to stipulate in his shipping 
agreement for an allotment of any portion of the wages he may earn to his 
grandparents, parents, wife, sister, or children. 

“‘(c) That no allotment shall be valid unless in writing and signed by and 
approved by the shipping commissioner. It shall be the duty of the said com¬ 
missioner to examine such allotments and the parties to them and enforce com¬ 
pliance with the law. All stipulations for the allotment of any part of the 
wages of a seaman during his absence which are made at the commencement 
of the voyage shall he inserted in the agreement and shall state the amounts 
and times of the payments to be made and the persons to whom the payments 
are to be made. 

“‘(d) That no allotment except as provided for in this section shall be 
lawful. Any person who shall falsely claim to be such relation, as above de¬ 
scribed. of a seaman under this section shall for every such offense be pnn- 
islied by a fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment not exceeding six months, 
at the discretion of the court. 

“‘(e) That this sect'on shall apply as well to foreign vessels while in 
waters of the United States as to vessels of the United States, and any master, 
owner, consignee, or agent of any foreign vessel who has violated its provisions 
shall be liable to the same penalty that the master, owner, or agent of a vessel 
of the United States would be for similar violation. 

“ ‘ The master, owner, consignee, or agent of any vessel of the United States, 
or of any foreign vessel seeking clearance from a port of the United States, 
shall present his shipping articles at the office of clearance, and no clearance 
shall be granted any such vessel unless the provisions of this section have 
been complied with. 

“‘(f) That under the direction of the Secretary of Commerce the Commis¬ 
sioner of Navigation shall make regulations to carry out this section.’ ” 

Sec. 12. That no wages due or accruing to any seaman or apprentice shall be 
subject to attachment or arrestment from any court, and every payment of 
wages to a seaman or apprentice shall be valid in law, notwithstanding any 
previous sale or assignment of wages or of any attachment, encumbrance, or 
arrestment thereon; and no assignment or sale of wages or of salvage made 
prior to the accruing thereof shall bind the party making the same, except 
such allotments as are authorized by this title. This section shall apply to 
fishermen employed on fishing vessels as well as to seamen: Provided, That 
nothing contained in this or any preceding section shall interfere with the 
order by any court regarding the payment by any seaman of any part of his 
wages for the support and maintenance of his wife and minor children. Sec¬ 
tion 4536 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby repealed. 

Sec. 13. That no vessel of 100 tons gross and upward, except those navigating 
rivers exclusively and the smaller inland lakes, and except as provided in sec¬ 
tion 1 of this act, shall be permitted to depart from any port of the United 
States unless she has on board a crew not less than 75 per cent of which, in 
each department thereof, are able to understand any order given by the officers 
of such vessels, nor unless 40 per cent in the first year, 45 per cent in the 
second year, 50 per cent in the third year, 55 per cent in the fourth year after 
the passage of this act, and thereafter 65 per cent of her deck crew, exclusive 
of licensed officers and apprentices, are of a rating not less than able seaman. 
Every person shall be rated an able seaman and qualified for service as such 
on the seas who is 19 years of age or upward and has had at least three 
years’ service on deck at sea or on the Great Lakes on a vessel or vessels to 
which this section applies, including decked fishing vessels, naval vessels, or 
Coast Guard vessels; and every person shall be rated an able seaman and 
qualified to serve as such on the Great Lakes and on the smaller lakes, bays, 
or sounds who is 19 years of age or upward and has had at least 18 months’ 
service on deck at sea or on the Great Lakes or on the smaller lakes, bays, or 
sounds on a vessel or vessels to which this section applies, including decked 
fishing vessels, naval vessel, or Coast Guard vessels; and graduates of school 
ships approved by and conducted under rules prescribed by the Secretary of 
Commerce may be rated able seamen after 12 months’ service at sea: Provided , 
That upon examination, under rules prescribed by the Department of Com¬ 
merce as to eyesight, hearing, and physical condition, such persons or gradu- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 11 


ates are found to be competent: Provided f urther, That upon examination, 
under rules prescribed by the Department of Commerce as to eyesight, hearing, 
physical condition, and knowledge of the duties of seamanship, a person found 
competent may be rated as able seaman after having served on deck 12 months 
at sea or on the Great Lakes; but seamen examined and rated able seamen 
under this proviso shall not in any case compose more than one-fourth of the 
number of able seamen required by this section to be shipped or employed upon 
any vessel. 

Any person may make application to any board of local inspectors for a cer¬ 
tificate of service as able seaman, and upon proof being made to said board by 
affidavit and examination, under rules approved by the Secretary of Commerce, 
showing the national’ty and age of the applicant and the vessel or vessels on 
which lie has had service and that he is entitled to such certificate under the 
provisions of this section, the board of local inspectors shall issue to said 
applicant a cert ficate of serv.ce, which shall be retained by him and be ac¬ 
cented as nrima facie evidence of bis rating as an able seaman. 

Cach board oi local inspectors shall keep a complete record of all certificates 
of service issued by them and to whom issued and shall keep on file the affi¬ 
davits uopn which sa d certificates are issued. 

The collector of customs may, upon bis own motion, and Shall, upon the sworn 
information of any reputable citizen of the United States setting forth that 
this section is not being compl ed with, cause a muster of the crew of any vessel 
toTie made to determine the fact; and no clearance shall be given to any vessel 
failing to comply with the provisions of this section: Provided, That the collec¬ 
tor of customs shall not be required to cause such muster of the crew to be 
made unless said sworn information has been filed with him for at least six 
hours before the vessel departs, or is scheduled to depart: Provided further, 
That any person that shall knowingly make a false affidavit for such purpose 
shall be deemed guilty of perjury and upon conviction thereof shall be punished 
by a fine not exceeding $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by 
both such fine and imprisonment, within the discretion of the court. Any 
violation of any provision of this section by the owner, master, or officer in 
charge of the vessel shall subject the owner of such vessel to a penalty of not 
less than $100 and not more than $500: And provided further, That the Sec¬ 
retary of Commerce shall mak^ such rules and regulations as may be necessary 
to carry out the provisions of th s sect on, and nothing herein shall be held 
or construed to prevent the Board of Supervising Inspectors, with the approval 
of the Secretary of Commerce, from making rules and regulations authorized 
by law as to vessels excluded from the operation of this section. 

Sec. 14. That section 4488 of the Revised Statutes is hereby amended by add¬ 
ing thereto the follow ng: “ r rhe powers bestowed by this section upon the 
Board of Supervising Inspectors in respect of lifeboats, floats, rafts, life pre¬ 
servers, and other 1 fe-saving appliances and equipment, and the further require¬ 
ments herein as to davits, embarkation of passengers in lifeboats and rafts, and 
the manning of lifeboats and rafts, and the musters and drills of the crews, on 
steamers navigating the ocean, or any lake, bay, or sound of the United States, 
on and after July 1. 1915, shall be subject to the provisions, limitations, and 
minimum requirements of the regulations herein set forth, and all such vessels 
shall thereafter be required to comply in all respects therewith: Provided, 
That foreign vessels leaving ports of the United States shall comply with the 
rules herein prescribed as to life-saving appliances, their equipment, and the 
manning of same.” 

Regulations—Life-Saving Appliances. 


STANDARD TYPES OF BOATS. 


The standard types of boats classified as follows: 

Class. Section. Typo. 

A. Open. Internal buoyancy only. 

B. Open. Internal and external buoyancy. 

C. Pontoon. Well deck; fixed water-tight bul¬ 
warks. 

A. Open. Upper part of sides collapsible. 

B. Pontoon. Well deck; collapsible water-tight 
bulwarks. 

C. Pontoon. Flush deck ; collapsible water-tight 
bulwarks. 


I. (Entirely rigid sides.) 


II. (Partially collapsible sides. )< 




12 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

STRENGTH OF BOATS. 

Each boat must be of sufficient strength to enable it to be safely lowered into 
the water when loaded with its full complement of persons and equipment. 

ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF BOATS AND RAFTS. 

Any type of boat may be accepted as equivalent to a boat of one of the pre¬ 
scribed classes and any type of raft is equivalent to an approved pontoon raft, 
if the board of supervising inspectors, with the approval of the Secretary of 
Commerce, is satisfied by suitable trials that it is as effective as the standard 
types of the class in question, or as the approved type of pontoon raft, as the 
case may be. 

Motor boats may be accepted if they comply with the requirements laid down 
for boats of the first class, but only to a limited number, which number shall 
be determined by the board of supervising inspectors, with the approval of the 
Secretary of Commerce. 

No boat may be approved the buoyancy of which depends upon the previous 
adjustment of one of the principal parts of the hull or which has not a cubic 
capacity of at least 125 cubic feet. 

BOATS OF THE FIRST CLASS. 

The standard types of boats of the first class must satisfy the following 
conditions: 

IA. Open boats with internal buoyancy only. —The buoyancy of a wooden 
boat of this type shall be provided by water-tight air cases, the total volume 
of which shall be at least equal to one-tenth of the cubic capacity of the boat. 

The buoyancy of a metal boat of this type shall not be less than that required 
above for a wooden boat of the same cubic capacity, the volume of water-tight 
air cases being increased accordingly. 

IB. Open boats with internal and external buoyancy. —The internal buoy¬ 
ancy of a wooden boat of this type shall be provided by water-tight air 
cases, the total volume of which is at least equal to 74 per cent of the cubic 
capacity of the boat. 

The external buoyancy may be of cork or of any other equally efficient mate¬ 
rial, but such buoyancy shall not be secured by the use of rushes, cork shavings, 
loose granulated cork, or any other loose granulated substance, or by any means 
dependent upon inflation by air. 

If the buoyancy is of cork, its volume, for a wooden boat, shall not be less 
than thirty three thousandths of the cubic capacity of the boat; if of any mate¬ 
rial other than cork, its volume and distribution shall be such that the buoyancy 
and stability of the boat are not less than that of a similar boat provided with 
buoyancy of cork. 

The buoyancy of a metal boat shall be not less than that required above for 
a wooden boat of the same cubic capacity, the volume of the air cases and exter¬ 
nal buoyancy being increased accordingly. 

IC. Pontoon boats, in which persons can not be accommodated below the deck, 
having a well deck and fixed water-tight bulwarks. —The area of the well deck 
of a boat of this type shall be at least 30 per cent of the total deck area. The 
height of the well deck above the water line at all points shall be at least equal 
to one-half of 1 per cent of the length of the boat, this height being increased to 
li per cent of the length of the boat at the ends of the well. 

The freeboard of a boat of this type shall be such as to provide for a reserve 
buoyancy of at least 35 per cent. 

BOATS OF THE SECOND CLASS. 

The standard types of boats of the second class must satisfy the following 
conditions: 

2A. Open boats having the upper part of the sides collapsible. —A boat of this 
type shall be fitted both with water-tight air cases and with external buoyancy, 
the volume of which, for each person which the boat is able to accommodate, 
shall be at least equal to the following amounts: Air cases, 1.5 cubic feet; 
external buoyancy (if of cork), two tenths cubic foot. 

The minimum freeboard of boats of this type is fixed in relation to their 
length; it is measured vertically to the top of the solid hull at the side amid¬ 
ships, from the water level when the boat is loaded. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^S ACT. 13 
The freeboard in fresh water shall not be less than the following amounts: 


Length of 

Minimum 

the boat. 

freeboard. 

Feet. 

Inches. 

26 

8 

28 

9 

30 

10 


The freeboard of boats of intermediate lengths is to be found bv interpola¬ 
tion. 

2B. Pontoon boats having a well deck and collapsible bulwarks— All the con¬ 
ditions laid down for boats of type 1C are to be applied to boats of this type, 
which differ from those of type 1C only in regard to the bulwarks. 

2C. Pontoon boats, in which the persons can not be accommodated below deck, 
having a flush deck and collapsible bulwarks .—The minimum freeboard of boats 
of this type is independent of their lengths and depends only upon their depth. 
The depth of the boat is to be measured vertically from the underside of the 
garboard strake to the top of the deck on the side amidships, and the freeboard 
is to be measured from the top of the deck at the side amidships to the water 
level when the boat is loaded. 

The freeboard in fresh water shall not be less than the following amounts, 
which are applicable without correction to boats having a mean sheer equal to 
3 per cent of their length: 


Depth of 
boat. 

Minimum 

freeboard. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

12 

2f 

18 

3f 

20 


30 

6* 


For intermediate depths the freeboard is obtained by interpolation. 

If the sheer is less than the standard sheer defined above, the minimum free¬ 
board is obtained by adding to the figures in the table one-seventh of the differ¬ 
ence between the standard sheer and the actual mean sheer measured at the 
stem and sternpost. No deduction is to be made from the freeboard on account 
of the sheer being greater than the standard sheer or on account of the camber 
of the deck 

MOTOR BOATS. 

When motor boats are accepted the volume of internal buoyancy and, when 
fitted, the external buoyancy, must be fixed, having regard to the difference 
between the weight of the motor and its accessories and the weight of the addi¬ 
tional persons which the boat could accommodate if the motor and its accessories 
were removed. 

ARRANGEMENTS FOR CLEARING PONTOON LIFEBOATS OF WATER. 

All pontoon lifeboats shall be fitted with efficient means for quickly clearing 
the deck of water. The orifices for this purpose shall be such that the water 
can not enter the boat through them when they are intermittingly submerged. 
The number and size of the orifices shall be determined for each type of boat 
by a special test. 

For the purpose of this test the pontoon boat shall be loaded with a weight 
of iron or bags of sand, equal to that of its completement of persons and 
equipment. 

In the case of a boat 28 feet in length 2 tons of water shall be cleared from 
the boat in a time not exceeding the following: Type 1C, 60 seconds; type 2B, 
60 seconds; type 2C, 20 seconds. 

In the case of a boat having a length greater or less than 28 feet the weight 
of water to be cleared in the same time shall be, for each type, directly pro¬ 
portional to the length of the boat. 










14 


AMENDING SECTIONS 


2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S 


ACT. 


CONSTRUCTION OF BOATS. 

Open lifeboats of tlie first class (types 1A and IK) must have a mean sheer at 
least equal to 4 per cent of tlieir length. 

The air cases of open boats of the first class shall be placed along the sides 
of the boat; they may also be placed at the ends of the boat, but not in the 

bottom of the boat. ^ , 

Pontoon lifeboats may be built of wood or metal. It constructed of wood, 
they shall have the bottom and deck made of two thicknesses with textile 
material between; if of metal, they shall be divided into water-tight compart¬ 
ments with means of access to each compartment. 

All boats shall be fitted for use of a steering oar. 

PONTOON RAFTS. 

No type of pontoon raft may be approved unless it satisfies the following 
conditions: 

First. It should be reversible and fitted with bulwarks of wood, canvass, or 
other suitable material on both sides. These bulwarks may be collapsible. 

Second. It should be of such size, strength, and weight that it can be handled 
without mechanical appliances, and, if necessary, be thrown from the vessel’s 
deck. 

Third. It should have not less than 3 cubic feet of air cases or equivalent 
buoyancy for each person whom it can acccomodate. 

Fourth. It should have a deck area of not less than 4 square feet for each 
person whom it can accomodate and the platform should not be less than 6 
inches above the water level when the raft is loaded. 

Fifth. The air cases or equivalent buoyancy should be placed as near as 
possible to the sides of the raft. 

CAPACITY OF BOATS AND PONTOON RAFTS. 

First. The number of persons which a boat of one of the standard types or a 
pontoon raft can accomodate is equal to tlie greatest whole number obtained 
by dividing the capacity in cubic feet, or the surface in square feet, of the 
boat or of the raft by the standard unit of capacity, or unit of surface (accord¬ 
ing to circumstances), defined below for each type. 

Second. The cubic capacity in feet of a boat in which the number of persons 
is deteermined by the surface shall be assumed to be 10 times the number 
of persons which it is authorized to carry. 

Third. The standard units of capacity and surface are as follows: 

Units of capacity, open boats, type 1A, 10 cubic feet; open boats, type IB, 
9 cubic feet. 

Unit of surface, open boats, type 2A, 31 square feet; pontoon boats, type 2C, 
31 square feet; pontoon boats, type 1C, 31 square feet; pontoon boats, type 2B, 
31 square feet. 

Fourth. The board of supervising inspectors, with the approval of the Secre¬ 
tary of Commerce, may accept, in place of 31, a smaller divisor, if it is satisfied 
after trial that the number of persons for whom there is seating accommodation 
in the pontoon boat in question is greater than the number obtained by applying 
the above divisor, provided always that the divisor adopted in place of 31 
may never be less than 3. 


CAPACITY LIMITS. 

Pontoon boats and pontoon rafts shall never be marked with a number of 
persons greater than that obtained in the manner specified in this section. 

This number shall be reduced— 

First. When it is greater than the number of persons for which there is 
proper seating accommodation, the latter number being determined in such a 
way that the persons when seated do not interfere in any way with the use 
of the oars. 

Second. When in the case of boats other than those of the first two sections 
of the first class the freeboard, when the boat is fully loaded, is less than the 
freeboard laid down for each type respectively. In such circumstances the num¬ 
ber shall be reduced until the freeboard, when the boat is fully loaded, is at 
least equal to the standard freeboard laid down above. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 15 

In boats of types 1C and 2B the raised part of the deck at the sides may he 
regarded as affording seating accommodation. 

EQUIVALENTS FOR AND WEIGHT OF THE PERSONS. 

In test for determining the number of persons which a boat or pontoon raft 
can accommodate each person shall be assumed to be an adult person wearing a 
life jacket. 

In verifications of freeboard the pontoon boats shall he loaded with a weight 
of at least 165 pounds for each adult person that the pontoon boat is authorized 
to carry. 

In all cases two children under 12 years of age shall he reckoned as one per¬ 
son. 


CUBIC CAPACITY OF OPEN BOATS OF THE FIRST CLASS. 


First. The cubic capacity of on open boat of type 1A or IB shall be determined 
by Stirling’s (Simpson’s) rule or by any other method approved by the board of 
supervis ng inspectors, giving the same degree of accuracy. The'capacity of a 
square-sterned boat shall be calculated as if the boat had a pointed stern. 

Second. For example, the capacity in cubic feet of a boat, calculated by the 
aid of Stirling’s rule, may be considered as given by the following formula : 

1 

Capacity (4A+2B+4C) 

1 being the length of the boat in meters (or feet) from the inside of the plank¬ 
ing or plating at the stem to the corresponding point at the stern post ; in the 
ease of a boat, with a square stern, the length is measured to the inside of the 
transom. 

A, B. C denote, respectively, the areas of the cross sections at the quarter- 
length forward, amidships, and the quarter length aft, which correspond to the 
three points obtained by dividing 1 into four equal parts. (The areas corre¬ 
sponding to the two ends of the boat are considered negligible.) 

The areas A, B, C shall be deemed to be g ven in square feet by the succes¬ 
sive application of the following formula to each of the three cross' sections: 

h 

Area=-j 2 (a+4b+2c-f 4d+e). 

h being the depth measured in meters (or in feet) inside the planking or plat¬ 
ing from the keel to the level of the gunwale, or, in certain cases, to a lower level, 
as determined hereafter. 

a, b, c, d, e denote the horizontal breadths of the boat measured in feet at the 
upper and lower points of the depth and at the three points obtained by divid¬ 
ing h into four equal parts (a and e being the breadths at the extreme points, 
and c at the middle point, of li). 

Third. If the sheer of the gunwale, measured at the two points situated at a 
quarter of the length of the boat from the ends, exceeds 1 per cent of the length 
of the boat, the depth employed in calculating the area of the cross sections 
A or C shall be deemed to be the depth amidships plus 1 per cent of the length 
of the boat. 

Fourth. If the depth of the boat amidships exceeds 45 per cent of the 
breadth, the depth employed in calculating the area of the midship cross sec¬ 
tion B shall be deemed to be equal to 45 per cent of the breadth; and the depth 
employed in calculating the areas of the quarter-length sections A and C is 
obtained by increasing this last figure by an amount equal to 1 per cent of the 
length of the boat, provided that in no case shall the depths employed in the 
calculation exceed the actual depths at these points. 

Fifth. If the depth of the boat is greater than 4 feet, the number of persons 
given by the application of this rule shall be reduced in proportion to the ratio 
of 4 feet to the actual depth, until the boat has been satisfactorily tested afloat 
with that number of persons on board all wearing life jackets. 

Sixth. The Board of Supervising Inspectors shall impose, by suitable for¬ 
mulae, a limit for the number of persons allowed in boats with very fine ends 
and in boats very full in form. 


16 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ^S ACT. 

Seventh. The Board of Supervising Inspectors may by regulation assign to 
a boat a capacity equal to the product of the length, the breadth, and the depth 
multiplied by six-tenths if it is evident that this formula does not give a 
greater capacity than that obtained by the above method. The dimensions 
shall then be measured in the following manner: 

Length. From the intersection of the outside of the planking with the stem 
to the corresponding point at the sternpost or, in the case of a square-sterned 
boat, to the afterside of the transom. 

Breadth. From the outside of the planking at the point where the breadth 
of the boat is greatest. 

Depth. Amidships inside the planking from the keel to the level of the 
gunwale, but the depth used in calculating the cubic capacity may not in any 
case exceed 45 per cent of the breadth. 

In all cases the vessel owner has the right to require that the cubic capacity 
of the boat shall be determined by exact measurement. 

Eighth. The cubic capacity of a motor boat is obtained from the gross capacity 
by deducting a volume equal to that occupied by the motor and its accessories. 

DECK AREA OF PONTOON BOATS AND OPEN BOATS OF THE SECOND CLASS. 

First. The area of the deck of a pontoon boat of type 1C, 2B, or 2C shall be 
determined by the method indicated below or by any other method giving the 
same degree of accuracy. The same rule is to be applied in determining the 
area within the fixed bulwarks of a boat of type 2A. 

Second. For example, the surface in square feet of a boat may be deemed to 
be given by the following formula : 

Area= jg ^5a+1.5b+4c+1.5d+2e^ > 

1 being the length in feet from the intersection of the outside of the planking 
with the stem to the corresponding point at the sternpost. 

a, b, c, d, e denote tbe horizontal breadths in feet outside the planking at the 
points obtained by dividing 1 into four equal parts and subdividing the foremost 
and aftermost parts into two equal parts (a and e being the breadths at the 
extreme subdivisions, c at the middle point of the length, and b and d at the 
intermediate points). 

MARKING OF BOATS AND PONTOON RAFTS. 

The dimensions of the boat and the number of persons which it is authorized 
to carry shall be marked on it in clear, permanent characters, according to 
regulations by the Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary 
of Commerce. These marks shall be specifically approved by the officers ap¬ 
pointed to inspect the ship. 

Pontoon rafts shall be marked with the number of persons in the same 
manner. 

EQUIPMENT OF BOATS AND PONTOON RAFTS. 

First. The normal equipment of every boat shall consist of— 

(a) A single banked complement of oars and two spare oars; one set and a 
half of thole pins or crutches; a boat hook. 

(b) Two plugs for each plug hole (plugs are not required when proper 
automatic valves are fitted) ; a bailer and a galvanized-iron bucket. 

(c) A tiller or yoke and yoke lines. 

(d) Two hatchets. 

(e) A lamp filled with oil and trimmed. 

(f) A mast or masts with one sail at least, and proper gear for each. (This 
does not apply to motor lifeboats or lifeboats on the Great Lakes or other in¬ 
land waters.) 

(g) A suitable compass. 

Pontoon lifeboats will have no plug hole, but shall be provided with at least 
two bilge pumps. 

In the case of a steamer which carries passengers in the North Atlantic, all 
the boats need not be equipped with masts, sails, and compasses, if the ship 
is provided with a radiotelegraph installation. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 17 


Second. The normal equipment of every approved pontoon raft shall con¬ 
sist of—- 

(a) Four oars. 

(b) Five rowlocks. 

(c) A self-igniting life-buoy light. 

Third. In addition, every boat and every pontoon raft shall be equipped 
with—• 

(a) A life line becketed around the outside. 

(b) A sea anchor. 

(c) A painter. 

(d) A vessel containing one gallon of vegetable or animal oil. The vessel 
shall be so constructed that the oil can be easily distributed on the water and 
so arranged that it can be attached to the sea anchor. 

(e) A water-tight receptacle containing two pounds avoirdupois of pro¬ 
visions for each persons, except on vessels navigating fresh water. 

(f) A water-tight receptacle containing one quart of water for each person, 
except on vessels navigating fresh water. 

(g) A number of self-igniting “ red lights ” and a water-tight box of matches. 

Fourth. All loose equipment must be securely attached to the boat or pon¬ 
toon raft to which it belongs. 

STOWAGE OF BOATS-NUMBER OF DAVITS. 

The minimum number of sets of davits is fixed in relation to the length of 
the vessel; provided that a number of sets of davits greater than the number 
of boats necessary for the accommodation of all the persons on board may 
not be required. 


HANDLING OF THE BOATS AND BAFTS. 

All the boats and rafts must be stowed in such a way that they can be 
launched in the shortest possible time and that, even under unfavorable con¬ 
ditions of list and trim from the point of view of the handling of the boats and 
rafts, it may be possible to embark in them as large a number of persons as 
possible. 

The arrangements must be such that it may be possible to launch on either 
side of the vessel as large a number of boats and rafts as possible. 

STRENGTH AND OPERATION OF THE DAVITS. 

The davits shall be of such strength that the boats can be lowered with their 
full complement of persons and equipment, the vessel being assumed to have 
a list of 15°. 

The davits must be fitted with a gear of sufficient power to insure that the 
boat can be turned out against the maximum list under which the lowering 
of the boats is possible on the vessel in question. 

OTHER APPLIANCES EQUIVALENT TO DAVITS. 

Any appliance may be accepted in lieu of davits or sets of davits if the board 
of supervising inspectors, with the approval of the Secretary of Comhierce, is 
satisfied after proper trials that the appliance in question is as effective as 
davits for placing the boats in the water. 

DAVITS. 

Each set of davits shall have a boat of the first class attached to it, provided 
that the number of open boats of the first class attached to davits shall not be 
less than the minimum number fixed by the table which follows. 

If it is neither practicable nor reasonable to place on a vessel the minimum 
number of sets of davits required by the rules, the board of supervising inspec¬ 
tors, with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce, may authorize a smaller 
number of sets of davits to be fitted, provided always that this number shall 
never be less than the minimum number of open boats of the first class required 
by the rules. 

48420—21-2 


18 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 


If a large proportion of the persons on board are accommodated in boats 
whose length is greater than 50 feet, a further reduction in the number of sets 
of davits may be allowed exceptionally, if the board of supervising inspectors, 
with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce, is satisfied that the arrange¬ 
ments are in all respects satisfactory. 

In all cases in which a reduction in the minimum number of sets of davits or 
other equivalent appliances required by the rules is allowed, the owner of the 
vessel in question shall be required to prove, by a test made in the presence of 
an officer designated by the Supervising Inspector General, that all the boats 
can be efficiently launched in a minimum time. 

The conditions of this test shall be as follows: 

First. The vessel is to be upright and in smooth water. 

Second. The time is the time required from the beginning of the removal of 
the boat covers, or any other operation necessary to prepare the boats for low¬ 
ering, until the last boat or pontoon raft is afloat. 

Third. The number of men employed in the whole operation must not exceed 
the total number of boat hands that will be carried on the vessel under normal 
service conditions. 

Fourth. Each boat when being lowered must have on board at least two men 
and its full equipment as required by the rules. 

The time allowed for putting all the boats into the water shall be fixed by 
the board of supervising inspectors, with the approval of the Secretary of Com¬ 
merce. 

MINIMUM NUMBER OF DAVITS AND OF OPEN BOATS OF THE FIRST CLASS-MINIMUM 

BOAT CAPACITY. 

The following table fixes, according to the length of the vessel— 

(A) The minimum number of sets of davits to be provided, to each of which 
must be attached a boat of the first class in accordance with this section. 

(B) The minimum total number of open boats of the first class, which must 
be attached to davits, in accordance with this section. 

(C) The minimum boat capacity required, including the boats attached to 
davits and the additional boats, in accordance with this section. 


Registered length of the 
ship (feet). 

(A) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
number 
of sets 
of 

davits. 

(B) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
number 
of open 
boats of 
the first 
class. 

(C) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
capac¬ 
ity of 
life¬ 
boats. 

Registered length of the 
ship (feet). 

(A) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
number 
of sets 
of 

davits. 

(B) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
number 
of open 
boats of 
the first 
class. 

(C) 
Mini¬ 
mum 
capac¬ 
ity of 
life¬ 
boats. 

100 and less than 120. 

2 

2 

Cu.ft. 

980 

435 and less than 460. 

12 

9 

Cu.ft. 
14,430 

120 and less than 140. 

2 

2 

1,220 

460 and less than 490. 

14 

10 

15,920 

140 and less than 160. 

2 

2 

1,550 

490 and less than 520. 

14 

10 

17,310 

160 and less than 175. 

3 

3 

1,880 ! 

520 and less than 550. 

16 

12 

18,720 

175 and less than 190. 

3 

3 

2,390 

550 and less than 580. 

16 

12 

20', 350 

190 and less than 205. 

4 

4 

2, 740 

580 and less than 610. 

18 

13 

21,900 

205 and less than 220. 

4 

4 

3.330 

610 and less than 640. 

18 

13 

23,700 

220 and less than 230... . 

5 

4 

3,900 
4,560 i 

640 and less than 670 .... 

20 

14 

25,350 
27,050 

230 and less than 245. 

5 

4 

670 and less than 700. 

20 

14 

245 and less than 255 .... 

6 

5 

5,100 1 
5,640 1 

700 and less than 730 

22 

15 

28,560 
30,180 

255 and less than 270. 

6 

5 

730 and less than 760. 

22 

15 

270 and less than 285 .. 

7 

5 

6,190 

760 and less than 790 

24 

17 

32,100 
34,350 

285 and less than 300. 

7 

5 

6,930 | 

790 and less than 820. 

24 

17 

300 and less than 315. 

8 

6 

7,550 1 

820 and less than 855 .. . 

26 

18 

36,450 
38,750 

315 and less than 330. 

8 

6 

8', 290 

855 and less than 890. 

26 

18 

330 and less than 350. 

9 

7 

9,000 

890 and less than 925. 

28 

19 

41,000- 

350 and less than 370. 

9 

7 

9,630 

925 and less than 960. 

28 

19 

43', 880 

370 and less than 390. 

10 

7 

10,650 

960 and less than 995. 

30 

20 

46,350 

390 and less than 410. 

10 

7 

11,700 

995 and less than 1,030.... 

30 

20 

48,750 

410 and less than 435. 

12 

9 

13,060 




When the length of the vessel exceeds 1,030 feet, the board of supervising 
inspectors, with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce,' shall determine the 
minimum number of sets of davits and of open boats of the first class for that 
vessel. 































































AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 19 


EMBARKATION OF THE PASSENGERS IN THE LIFEBOATS AND RAFTS. 

Suitable arrangements shall be made for embarking the passengers in the 
boats, in accord with regulations by the board of supervising inspectors, with 
the approval of the Secretary of Commerce. 

In vessels which carry rafts there shall be a number of rope or wooden lad¬ 
ders always available for use in embarking the persons on to the rafts. 

The number and arrangement of the boats, and (where they are allowed) of 
the pontoon rafts on a vessel depends upon the total number of persons which 
the vessel is intended to carry: Provided , That there shall not be required 
on any voyage a total capacity in boats, and (where they are allowed) pontoon 
rafts greater than that necessary to accommodate all the persons on board. 

At no moment of its voyage shall any passenger steam vessel of the United 
States on ocean routes more than 20 nautical miles offshore have on board a 
total number of persons greater than that for whom accommodation is provided 
in the lifeboats and pontoon life rafts on board. 

If the lifeboats attached to davits do not provide sufficient accommodation 
for all persons on board, additional lifeboats of one of the standard types shall 
be provided. This addition shall bring the total capacity of the boats on the 
vessels at least up to the greater of the two following amounts: 

(a) The minimum capacity required by these regulations; 

( b) A capacity sufficient to accommodate 75 per cent of the persons on board. 

The remainder of the accommodation required shall be provided, under regu¬ 
lations of the board of supervising inspectors, approved by the Secretary of 
Commerce, either in boats of class one or class two, or in pontoon rafts of an 
approved type. 

At no moment of its voyage shall any passenger-steam vessel of the United 
States on ocean routes less than 20 nautical miles offshore have on board a 
total number of persons greater than that for whom accommodation is pro¬ 
vided in the lifeboats and pontoon rafts on board. The accommodation pro¬ 
vided in lifeboats shall in every case be sufficient to accommodate at least 
75 per cent of the persons on board. The number and type of such lifeboats 
and life rafts shall be determined by regulations of the board of supervising 
inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce: Provided , That during the 
interval from May 15 to September 15, inclusive, any passenger-steam vessel of 
the United States, on ocean routes less than 20 nautical miles offshore, shall 
be required to carry accommodation for not less than 70 per cent of the total 
number of persons on board in lifeboats and pontoon life rafts, of which accom¬ 
modation not less than 50 per cent shall be in lifeboats and 50 per cent may 
be in collapsible boats or rafts, under regulations of the board of supervising 
inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

At no moment of its voyage may any ocean-cargo steam vessel of the United 
States have on board a total number of persons greater than that for whom 
accommodation is provided in the lifeboats on board. The number and types 
of such boats shall be determined by regulations of the board of supervising 
inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

At no moment of its voyage may any passenger-steam vessel of the United 
States on the Great Lakes, on routes more than 3 miles offshore, except over 
waters whose depth is not sufficient to submerge all the decks of the vessel, 
have on board a total number of persons, including passengers and crew, 
greater than that for whom accommodation is provided in the lifeboats and 
pontoon life rafts on board. The accommodation provided in lifeboats shall in 
every case be sufficient to accommodate at least 75 per cent of the persons on 
board. The number and types of such lifeboats and life rafts shall be deter¬ 
mined by regulations of the board of supervising inspectors, approved by the 
Secretary of Commerce: Provided , That during the interval from May 15 to 
September 15, inclus've, any such steamer shall be required to carry accommo¬ 
dation for not less than 50 per cent of persons on board in lifeboats and pon¬ 
toon life rafts, of which accommodation not less than two-fifths shall be in 
lifeboats and three-fifths may be in collapsible boats or rafts, under regulations 
of the board of supervising inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce: 
Provided further , That all passenger-steam vessels of the United States, the 
keels of which are laid after the 1st of July, 1915, for service on ocean routes, 
or for service from September 15 to May 15 on the Great Lakes on routes 
more than 3 miles offshore, shall be built to carry, and shall carry, enough 
lfeboats and life rafts to accommodate all persons on board, including passen- 


20 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

gers and crew: And provided further, That not more than 25 per cent of such 
equipment may be in pontoon life rafts or collapsible lifeboats. 

At no moment of its voyage may any cargo-steam vessel of the United States 
on the Great Lakes have on board a total number of persons greater than that 
for whom accommodation is provided in the lifeboats on board. The number 
and types of such boats shall be determined by regulations of the board of 
supervising inspectors approved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

The number, ■ types, and capacity of lifeboats and life rafts, together with 
the proportion of such accommodation to the number of persons on board 
which shall be carried on steam vessels on the Great Lakes, on route 3 miles 
or less offshore or over waters whose depth is not sufficient to submerge all 
the decks of the vessel, and on all other lakes, and on rivers, bays, and sounds, 
shall be determined by regulations of the board of supervising inspectors, ap¬ 
proved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

All regulations by the board of supervising inspectors, approved by the Sec¬ 
retary of Commerce, authorized by this act, shall be transmitted to Congress 
as soon as practicable after they are made. 

The Secretary of Commerce is authorized in specific cases to exempt exist¬ 
ing vessels from the requirements of this section that the davits shall be of 
such strength and shall be fitted with a gear of sufficient power to insure that 
the boats can be lowered with their full complement of persons and equipment, 
the vessel being assumed to have a list of 15°, where their strict application 
would not be practicable or reasonable. 

CERTIFICATED LIFEBOAT MEN-MANNING OF THE BOATS. 

There shall be for each boat or raft a number of lifeboat men at least equal 
to that specified as follows: If the boat or raft carries 25 persons or less, the 
minimum number of certified lifeboat men shall be 1; if the boat or raft 
carries 26 persons and less than 41 persons the minimum number of cer¬ 
tificated lifeboat men shall be 2; if the boat or raft carries 41 persons and less 
than 61 persons the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 3; 
if the boat or raft carries from 61 to 85 persons, the minimum number of 
certificated lifeboat men shall be 4; if the boat or raft carries from 86 to 110 
persons, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 5; if the 
boat or raft carries from 111 to 160 persons, the minimum number of certifi¬ 
cated lifeboat men shall be 6; if the boat or raft carries from 161 to 210 
persons, the minimum number of certificated lifeboat men shall be 7; and, 
thereafter, one additional certificated lifeboat man for each additional 50 
persons: Provided , That if the raft carries 15 persons or less a licensed officer 
or able seaman need not be placed in charge of such raft: Provided further, 
That one-half the number of rafts carried shall have a capacity of exceeding 
15 persons. 

The allocation of the certificated lifeboat men to each boat and raft remains 
within the discretion of the master, according to the circumstances. 

By “certificated lifeboat man” is meant any member of the crew who holds 
a certificate of efficiency issued under the authority of the Secretary of Com¬ 
merce, who is hereby directed to provide for the issue of such certificates. 

In order to obtain the special lifeboat man’s certificate the applicant must 
prove to the satisfaction of an officer designated by the Secretary of Commerce 
that he has Deen trained in all the operations connected with launching-life¬ 
boats and the use of oars; that he is acquainte:! with the practical handling of 
the boats themselves; and. further, that he is capable of understanding and 
answering the orders relative to lifeboat service. 

Section forty-four hundred and sixty-three of the Revised Statutes as 
amended is hereby amended by adding the words “ including certificated life¬ 
boat men, separately stated,” to the word “ crew ” wherever it occurs. 

MANNING OF BOATS. 

A licensed officer or able seaman shall be placed in charge of each boat or 
pontoon raft; lie shall have a list of its lifeboat men, and other members of 
its crew which shall be sufficient for her safe management, and shall see that 
the men placed under his orders are acquainted with their several duties and 
stations. 

A man capable of working the motor shall be assigned to each motor boat. 

The duty of seeing that the boats, pontoon rafts, and other lifesaving appli¬ 
ances are at all times ready for use shall be assigned to one or more officers. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 21 


MUSTER ROLL AND DRILLS. 

Special duties for the event of an emergency shall be allotted to each member 
of the crew. 

The muster list shows all these special duties, and indicates, in particular, 
the station to which each man must go, and the duties that he has to perform. 

Before the vessel sails the muster list shall be drawn up and exhibited, and 
the proper authority, to be designated by the Secretary of Commerce, shall be 
satisfied that the muster list has been prepared for the vessel. It shall be 
posted in several parts of the vessel, and in particular in the crew’s quarters. 

MUSTER LIST. 

The muster list shall assign duties to the different memberc of the crew in 
connection with— 

(a) The closing of the water-tight doors, valves, and so forth. 

(b) The equipment of the boats and rafts generally. 

(c) The launching of the boats attached to davits. 

(d) The general preparation of the other boats and the pontoon rafts. 

(e) The muster of the passengers. 

(f) The extinction of fire. 

The muster list shall assign to the members of the steward’s department 
their several duties in relation to the passengers at a time of emergency. These 
duties shall include— 

(a) Warning the passengers. 

(b) Seeing that they are dressed and have put on their life jackets in a 
proper manner. 

(c) Assembling the passengers. 

(d) Keeping order in the passages and on the stairways, and, generally, con¬ 
trolling the movements of the passengers. 

The muster list shall specify definite alarm signals for calling all the crew 
to the boat and fire stations, and shall give full particulars of these signals. 

MUSTERS AND DRILLS. 

Musters of the crews at their boat and fire stations, followed by boat and 
fire drills, respectively, shall be held at least once a week, either in port or at 
sea. An entry shall be made in the official log book of these drills, or of the 
reason why they could not be held. 

Different groups of boats shall be used in turn at successive boat drills. 
The drills and inspections shall be so arranged that the crew thoroughly under¬ 
stand and are practiced in the duties they have to perform, and that all the 
boats and pontoon rafts on the ship with the gear appertaining to them are 
always ready for immediate use. 

LIFE JACKETS AND LIFE BUOYS. 

A life jacket of an approved type, or other appliance of equal buoyancy and 
capable of being fitted on the body, shall be carried for every person on board, 
and, in addition, a sufficient number of life jackets, or other equivalent appli¬ 
ances, suitable for children. 

First. A life jacket shall satisfy the following conditions: 

(a) It shall be of approved material and construction. 

(b) It shall be capable of supporting in fresh water for 24 hours 15 pounds 
avoirdupois of iron. 

Life jackets the buoyancy of which depends on air compartments are pro¬ 
hibited. 

Second: A life buoy shall satisfy the following conditions: 

(a) It shall be of solid cork or any other equivalent material. 

(b) It shall be capable of supporting in fresh water for 24 hours at least 31 
pounds avoirdupois of iron. 

Life buoys filled with rushes, cork shavings, or granulated cork, or any other 
loose granulated material, or whose buoyancy depends upon air compartments 
which require to be inflated, are prohibited. 

Third. The minimum number of life buoys with which vessels are to be pro¬ 
vided is fixed as follows: 


22 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^S ACT. 


Length of the vessel under 400 feet, minimum number of buoys, 12; length of 
the vessel, 400 and under 600 feet, minimum number of buoys, 18; length of the 
vessel, 600 and under 800 feet, minimum number of buoys, 24; length of the 
vessel, 800 feet and over, minimum number of buoys, 30. 

Fourth. All the buoys shall be fitted with beckets securely seized. At least one 
buoy on each side shall be fitted with a life line of at least 15 fathoms in length. 
The number of luminous buoys shall not be less than one-half of the total num¬ 
ber of life buoys, and in no case less than 6. The lights shall be efficient self- 
igniting lights which can not be extinguished in water, and they shall be kept 
near the buoys to which they belong, with the necessary means of attachment. 

Fifth. All the life buoys and life jackets shall be so placed as to be readily 
accessible to the persons on board; their position shall be plainly indicated so 
as to be known to the persons concerned. 

The life buoys shall always be capable of being rapidly cast loose, and shall 
not be permanently secured in any way. The owner of any vessel who neglects 
or refuses to provide and equip his vessel with such lifeboats, floats, rafts, life 
preservers, line-carrying projectiles, and the means of propelling them, drags, 
pumps, or other appliances, as are required under the provisions of this section, 
or under the regulations of the Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the 
Secretary of Commerce, authorized by and made pursuant hereto, shall be fined 
not less than $500, nor more than $5,000, and every master of a vessel who shall 
fail to comply with the requirements of this section, and the regulations of the 
Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce, 
authorized by and made pursuant hereto, shall upon conviction be fined not less 
than $50, nor more than $500. Section 4489 of the Revised Statutes is hereby 
repealed. 

Sec. 15. That the owner, agent, or master of every barge which, while in tow 
through the open sea, has sustained or caused any accident, shall be subject in 
all respects to the provisions of sections 10, 11, 12, and 13 of chapter 344 of the 
Statutes at Large, approved June 20, 1874, and the reports therein prescribed 
shall be transmitted by collectors of customs to the Secretary of Commerce, who 
s*hall transmit annually to Congress a summary of such reports during the 
previous fiscal year, together with a brief statement of the action of the depart¬ 
ment in respect to such accidents. 

Sec. 16. That in the judgment of Congress articles in treaties and conventions 
of the United States, in so far as they provide for the arrest and imprisonment 
of officers and seamen deserting or charged with desertion from merchant ves¬ 
sels of the United States in foreign countries, and for the arrest and imprison¬ 
ment of officers and seamen deserting or charged with desertion from merchant 
vessels of foreign nations in the United States and the Territories and posses¬ 
sions thereof, and for the cooperation, aid, and protection of competent legal 
authorities in effecting such arrest or imprisonment and any other treaty pro¬ 
vision in conflict with the provisions of this act, ought to be terminated, and to 
this end the President be, and he is hereby, requested and directed, within 90 
days after the passage of this act, to give notice to the several Governments, 
respectively, that so much as hereinbefore described of all such treaties and con¬ 
ventions between the United States and foreign Governments will terminate on 
the expiration of such periods after notices have been given as may be required 
in such treaties and conventions. 

Sec. 17. That upon the expiration after notice of the periods required, respec¬ 
tively, by said treaties and conventions and of one year in the case of the inde¬ 
pendent State of the Kongo, so much as hereinbefore described in each and every 
one of said articles shall be deemed and held to have expired and to be of no 
force and effect, and thereupon section 5280 and so much of section 4081 of the 
Revised Statutes as relates to the arrest or imprisonment of officers and seamen 
deserting or charged with desertion from merchant vessels of foreign nations in 
the United States and Territories and possessions thereof, and for the coopera¬ 
tion, aid, and protection of competent legal authorities in effecting such arrest 
or imprisonment, shall be, and is hereby, repealed. 

Sec. 18. That this act shall take effect, as to all vessels of the United States, 
eight months after its passage, and as to foreign vessels 12 months after its 
passage, except that such parts hereof as are in conflict with articles of any 
treaty or convention with any foreign nation shall take effect as regards the 
vessels, of such foreign nation on the expiration of the period fixed in the notice 
of abrogation of the said articles as provided in section 16 of this act. 

Sec. 19. That section 16 of the act approved December 21, 1898, entitled “An 
act to amend the laws relating to American seamen, for the protection of such 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, ANI) 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 23 


seamen, and to promote commerce,” be amended by adding at the end of the 
section the following: 

“ Provided, That at the discretion of the Secretary of Commerce, and under 
such regulations as he may prescribe, if any seaman incapacitated from service 
by injury or illness is on board a vessel so situated that a prompt discharge 
requiring the personal appearance of the master of the vessel before an Ameri¬ 
can consul or consular agent is impracticable, such seaman may be sent to a 
consul or consular agent, who shall care for him and defray the cost of his 
maintenance and transportation, as provided in this paragraph.” 

Sec. 20. That in any suit to recover damages for any injury sustained on 
board vessel or in its service seamen having command shall not be held to be 
fellow servants with those under their authority. 

Approved, March 4, 1915. 

[Public —No. 89— 64th Congress.] 

[H. R. 13112.] 

AN ACT To amend section 14 of the seamen’s act of March 4, 1915. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, That section fourteen of the seamen’s Act of 
March 4, 1915, be amended by striking out subdivisions third and fourth of 
subsection headed “ Life jackets and life buoys,” regarding the number of life 
buoys with which steamers navigating the ocean, or any lake, bay, or sound of 
the United States shall be equipped, and inserting, in lieu thereof, the fol¬ 
lowing : 

“ Third. The minimum number of life buoys with which vessels are to be pro¬ 
vided is fixed as follows: 

“ Vessels under 100 feet in length, minimum number of buoys, 2; vessels 100 
feet and less than 200 feet in length, minimum number of buoys, 4, of which 2 
shall be luminous; vessels 200 feet and less than 300 feet in length, minimum 
number of buoys, 6, of which 2 shall be luminous; vessels 300 feet and less than 
400 feet in length, minimum number of buoys, 12, of which 4 shall be luminous; 
vessels 400 feet and less than 600 feet in length, minimum number of buoys, 
18, of which 9 shall be luminous; vessels 600 feet and less than 800 feet in 
length, minimum number of buoys, 24, of which 12 shall be luminous; vessels 
800 feet and over in length, minimum number of buoys, 30, of which 15 shall be 
luminous. 

“ Fourth. All the buoys shall be fitted with beckets securely seized. Where 
two buoys only are carried, one shall be fitted with a life line at least 15 fathoms 
in length, and where more than two buoys are carried, at least one buoy on each 
side shall be fitted with a life line of at least 15 fathoms in length. The lights 
shall be efficient self-igniting lights which can not be extinguished in water and 
they shall be kept near the buoys to which they helong, with the necessary 
means of attachment” 

Approved, June 12, 1916. 

The Chairman. We will hear from Mr. Scott at this point if he 
is ready to proceed. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Chairman, I think the procedure to be followed 
might be the presentation of the statements of the gentlemen here, 
representing chambers of commerce, shippers, etc., rather than a 
statement by me regarding the provisions of the bill. The com¬ 
mittee are all more or less familiar with the provisions of the bill. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. May I say, Mr. Chairman, there are some new 
Members here who are not very familiar with the purpose of the bill. 
If Mr. Scott will give us about two minutes or so on it, I think it 
would be of great assistance. 

Mr. Scott. My thought was this, Mr. Kirkpatrick: These gentle¬ 
men are all here away from their business. Most of them have come 
here at a great sacrifice and they are anxious to get away as soon 
as they can. 


24 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Very well. 

Mr. Scott. I had expected to thoroughly explain the provisions of 
the bill to the members of the committee, but I felt that considera¬ 
tion ought to be given to these men who are here from far distant 
points and who are anxious to get away as soon as they can. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. But we will get it at some time ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me suggest that a statement of the conditions 
which have led to the demand for this legislation will bring us up 
to the legislation itself, and that will probably be as good a way of 
getting the purpose of the bill as any other. Your witnesses can 
tell that. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; the witnesses can tell that. ' Of course, I do not 
object to making a statement, but I think we had better proceed 
to put in the statements of these gentlemen, and they will probably 
show you the conditions better than I could in a statement. 

The Chairman. Then we will hear the proponents of the bill first 
and, following them, the opponents. 

STATEMENT OF MR. R. J. MACLEAN, CHAIRMAN, INLAND WATER¬ 
WAYS COMMITTEE, DETROIT BOARD OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. MacLean. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee on 
Merchant Marine and Fisheries, several months ago, the Detroit 
Board of Commerce had its attention called, through the newspapers, 
to the fact that the seamen’s act should be amended as far as the 
Great Lakes was concerned^ and finally we called a meeting of our 
committee on inland waterways and invited a number of representa¬ 
tives of vessel owners to be present. We heard what they had to say 
and, later, we asked representatives of certain of the seamen’s un¬ 
ions to be present. We heard what they had to say. And then we 
called a conference of the boards of trade of the Great Lakes. That 
conference was held at Detroit April 8 and 9. There were 144 dele¬ 
gates present at the conference—men representing all the boards of 
commerce of the ports of the Great Lakes. 

It was a two-day session, at the end of which a bill was drafted 
which has since been introduced by Congressman Frank B. Scott of 
Michigan. Certain resolutions were drawn up and passed. One 
resolution was introduced a few days afterwards in the Michigan 
State Legislature and was passed unamimously by the State legisla¬ 
ture of Michigan, calling upon the Congress of the United States 
immediately to amend the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Chairman, an emergency exists on the Great Lakes. We are, 
to a very great extent, without transportation as far as passenger and 
packet freight service is concerned. Now, in order that you may 
know just what the condition is, I will call on certain men"who are 
here representing the conference that was held at Detroit—men who 
have been appointed by their boards of commerce to come here and 
tell you what the conditions are. 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me ask you this question before you get 
through: Will any of this discussion relate to conditions anywhere 
else than on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Maclean. On the Great Lakes. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 25 

Mr. Scott. On the Great Lakes and also on Lake Ontario. 

Mr. Chindblom. That is not as large as the others. 

Mr. Scott. I did not know whether you included Lake Ontario. 

Mr. Chindblom. Sure. 

Mr. Maclean. This conference, I should state to the committee, 
represented all of the Great Lakes. I will call first on Mr. J. E. 
Coad, who is here representing the great Muskegon Chamber of Com¬ 
merce, which is the second largest chamber of commerce in the State 
of Michigan. He also represents other interests, which he will state 
to you. I want Mr. Coad to state to you what the conditions are in 
Lake Michigan, and particularly on the western shore of the State of 
Michigan. 

STATEMENT OF MR. J. E. COAD, MUSKEGON, MICH., REPRESENT¬ 
ING THE GREATER MUSKEGON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. Coad. If the committee please, the chairman of our interests 
in introducing me spoke of me as representing the Muskegon Cham¬ 
ber of Commerce. I am also here representing the Manufacturers’ 
Association of Muskegon, and the Western Michigan Development 
Bureau, w T hich takes in a territory 60 miles in width and reaching 
from the Indiana line north to Grand Traverse Bay. The reason 
I speak of this particular representation is that you may know what 
interests, as you go along, are actually affected there in this case; in 
representing or speaking of Muskegon, that you may know where 
the city is—it is actually on the map, in western Michigan, 42 miles 
west of Grand Rapids. It is the largest city on the west coast of 
Michigan and is an industrial center which has increased during the 
last census of population about 400 per cent. We have there the 
Continental Motors Corporation, the largest of its kind in the world; 
the Shaw-Walker Cabinet Works, which are the largest of their 
kind, and the Brunswick-Balke Co., all three of those companies 
using the lakes extensively for shipping. 

In addition to the city, the territory represented is that of com¬ 
paratively new development, being devoted largely to fruits and 
small grain and vegetables, particularly potatoes; being served by 
lake carriers, principally by boats on Lake Michigan; having very 
poor rail transportation, particularly after leaving the city of Mus¬ 
kegon northward. The cities of Ludington, Manistee, and the other 
points between are very poorly served by railroad connections. 

At the present time we are seeking relief, but it does not seem 
possible, under similar conditions in the past, to expect them to build 
any new railroads. Hence, the boat lines must serve us; must serve 
us in the fall in time to get the fruit to the Chicago market; must 
take the potatoes out late in the fall, when poatoes need to be moved. 
It is necessary that we have transportation facilities equal to the 
service we are ready to render the American public in developing 
and producing food products of important and considerable volume. 

This territory, as I say, is new; it needs to be developed. It is 
fast becoming one of the greatest fruit belts in America; but it will 
be seriously handicapped if present conditions prevail. 

I have given this statement, gentlemen, by way of introduction 
to my remarks. 


26 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

Mr. Chindblom. Tell us just what railroads you have. 

Mr. Coad. We have, at the present time, if you please, the Pore 
Marquette Railroad only, serving the territory represented, and that 
only with branch spur lines. The other railroads to the extreme 
southern part of the territory serve only a limited territory, as rep - 
resented in the actual production of fruit and vegetables—particu¬ 
larly potatoes. 

I want to touch briefly upon the fact; we are greatly handicapped, 
due to the fact that we can not get boats when we need them. 
There was a time, several years ago, when that country developed 
very rapidly and, when boats were in abundance, to carry the fruit 
and produce to the market. But being handicapped now, you can 
readily see how the citizens who formerly were interested in main¬ 
taining the development and who were interested in settling on 
those lands, are now asking the question, u What are we going to 
do ? Are we going to have transportation facilities, or are we not ? 
In case we are not, we do not want your land; we do not want to 
move into Michigan; we will stay where we are.” Hence, the de¬ 
velopment of the country is slowing up, and will continue to slow up 
until some relief is given. 

Getting back to the city that I directly represent, the city of 
Muskegon, I will say this: That we are primarily a manufacturing 
city. We manufacture commodities that are being shipped to-day, 
as well you know, all over the world. We are using water trans¬ 
portation extensively where it is possible. The Brunswick-Balke Co., 
with a very large capitalization and a large volume of business, 
the largest of its kind of business in the world, manufacturing 
billiard supplies and equipment off that nature, have been handi¬ 
capped on the package freight shipments, as has also the Shaw- 
Walker Cabinet Works, manufacturing all sorts of filing devices, 
who have been using the boats very extensivcely, but recently have 
naturally returned to the rail almost entirely, and practically aban¬ 
doned the use of water transportation. It handicaps them very 
materially. 

Our condition there is being made very acute, and unless we get 
some relief, so as to be assured a better boat transportation, more 
boats to the West Shore—a great deal of our commerce goes west¬ 
ward—it must go through Chicago and be tied up there for weeks 
and weeks getting through the yards, where, before, we could ship 
via Milwaukee, across the lake, and get into that territory just as 
well. And unless we get some relief there is no question but that 
some of the industries are going to move away and get into a rail 
center where the rails will be used for commerce. That may be a 
very incidental matter, but it affects us very seriously. 

Those are the principal points I wanted to bring out, but if there 
are any questions you would like to ask me concerning the territory 
and interests and the fact of this inquiry to us, I would be glad, 
as far as possible, to answer them. 

Mr. Scott. I think the committee would be interested to know 
the character and extent of the water navigation service that you 
received prior to the war (prior to 1913), and how that service has 
depreciated between then and now, and what service you are getting 
now in comparison. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 27 

Mr. Coad. I will be real frank, Congressman Scott, in my state¬ 
ment on that. I have not served the city or been a resident of the 
city long enough to know the conditions prior to the war, other 
than those I have actually stated and those that have been handed 
down to me by my predecessor, which showed a service of three 
boats—five, in fact—at times, during the height of the season, and 
which service has been reduced now to a service of three boats at 
the height of the season. But I know full well, with the disap¬ 
pointments that we are getting on the Great Lakes’ shipments, those 
that are operating the lines out of our city will not need a boat at all 
after another year. They can just discontinue the boat service, as 
far as we are concerned, entirely, because we can go to some other 
resort, to some other service, and depend entirely upon that. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by a reduction of the service? 
Who takes off those boats? What,is the occasion of the taking off 
of the boats? 

Mr. Coad. The operators of the boats, if you please, have taken 
the boats off of the service, on the ground that the lines were losing 
money; they could not pay a profitable return on the investment, 
and some of the lines having gone into the hands of the receiver—an 
unprofitable device. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Coad, do you consider this reduction of that 
service due wholly to features of the Seamen’s Act which are sought 
to be remedied in Mr. Scott’s bill ? 

Mr. Coad. Answering you frankly, I would siay yes,, sir; abso¬ 
lutely. 

Mr. Davis. And you are of the opinion if this bill were to be en¬ 
acted, adequate service would be restored ? 

Mr. Coad. There seems to be no question about that. The busi¬ 
ness is there to warrant it, and the boat lines will get their share if 
they can show any reasonable amount of service. 

Mr. Chindblqm. Then, as I understand you, the real cause of your 
loss of transportation facilities by water is the conditions under 
which the ships have to travel and operate ? 

Mr. Coad. That is right. 

Mr. Hardy. It has been suggested, and I ask you tfie question— 
you had five boats and now you have only three ? 

Mr. Coad. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it a fact those other two were taken off and sold 
for the coastwise trade, at an enormous price or a very high price? 

Mr. Coad. That I can not answer. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not know whether the finding of an oppor¬ 
tunity to dispose of their property at a wonderfully advantageous 
price*caused the taking of those ships off or not? 

Mr. Coad. I think Mr. Thorp can answer that. 

Mr. Thorp. May I answer that question? For one of the boats 
that was taken off, Mr. Hardy, we got 60 per cent of the book value. 
That is what we got—not an enormous price for our ship. 

Mr. Hardy. At what time? 

Mr. Thorp. In 1918 . As carried on our books, we got 60 per 
cent of the book value of the ship and made a protest. 

Mr. Hardy. What proportion did the book value bear to the cost 
of the ship ? 


28 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Thorp. It was the cost of the ship less ordinary depreciation, 
and it would cost three times as much as we got from the Govern¬ 
ment to reproduce that ship. 

Mr. Hardy. You sold to the Government? 

Mr. Thorp. The Government commandeered it and gave us just 
what they wanted to. 

Mr. Hardy. When did you sell it ? 

Mr. Thorp. They took it from us in 1918. 

Mr. Hardy. Have they ever compensated you for it ? 

Mr. Thorp. To the extent of 60 per cent of the book value. 

Mr. Hardy. That is what you received ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. There were other ships sold at about the 
same rate. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That represented the cost, did it? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; not the reproduction value. The reproduction 
value would have been three or four times as much. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How long had the ship been in service? 

Mr. Thorp. The ship had been in service a good many years. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How many ? 

Mr. Thorp. I can not recall offhand. I should say IT or 18 years, 
but she was a valuable ship and they do not deteriorate rapidly in fresh 
water. 

Mr. Hardy. I have always understood water transportation was 
cheaper than rail transportation. Can you tell us what per cent of 
increase in freight rates these ships you now have have made over the 
prewar freight rates? 

Mr. Coad. I do not know that I can answer that for you, sir. I am 
not familiar with the prewar freight rates. The present rates— 
there is a considerable difference, of course, between rail and boat. 

Mr. Hardy. The rail being higher? 

Mr. Coad. The rail being higher. 

Mr. Hardy. Yow, is it not perfectly true, providing you have the 
freight to send by those boats, if you pay a rate that will make it 
remunerative, the boats would come there ? 

Mr. Coad. I can not say that they would. It would depend entirely 
upon whether they could render the service, of course. Our main 
market being Chicago, it would depend on whether they would render 
the service sufficiently regular that we could depend upon it. 

Mr. Hardy. What I am getting at is this: If you have the freight 
to carry on the Lakes and you can pay the amount necessary to make 
the transportation remunerative, would the boats come there; or is 
there something else that intervenes? 

Mr. Coad. I can not see that there is. I doubt very much, the rates 
being at all similar, that our industries would consider for a minute 
shipping by boat in preference to rail, because of knowing of the shore 
delivery and shore service. 

Mr. Hardy. What puzzles me is this: That water transportation is 
cheaper than rail. You have a slender rail transportation; your boats 
are leaving you, and nevertheless, I presume, claiming that it is be¬ 
cause of the high cost of their wages, or something of that sort. What 
is the percentages of labor cost that goes into the total cost of trans¬ 
portation by water ? 

Mr. Coad. That is a technical question I am not prepared to answer. 

Ma. Hardy. Is it not rather small ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 29 

Mr. Coad. I could not say. I have never figured that question up, 
sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to get at it, to see whether the ills you are suf¬ 
fering from arises out of the causes to which it is attributed. 

Mr. Coad. I am not prepared to answer on that point, but that will 
be taken care of as this matter goes along. 

Mr. Davis. I understood you to say unless conditions are changed 
the shippers will abandon the use of the service now being provided on 
the Great Lakes. What did you mean by that and why would that be 
necessary ? 

Mr. Coad. I mean this: That unless we can get better service, more 
dependable service on the boat line, with more frequent boats, our 
shippers, who are now pooling their interests this very week, will 
ship all their commodities by rail, and they are arranging an agree¬ 
ment with the Grand Trunk Railroad to the East, which will give 
them an outlet down as far as Montreal. 

Mr. Davis. In other words, do you mean unless you get more fre¬ 
quent departures and more regular schedules? 

Mr. Coad. That is what I am referring to, unless we have more fre¬ 
quent and more regular schedules; we are calling upon the rail serv¬ 
ice now, and they will improve their service and give other trains to 
relieve the situation, and they are promising to do that. 

Mr. Hardy. One reason for my question is, I find the condition of 
the gradual abandonment of boats seems to be encouraged in other 
places. Here is this little canal that for some time has brought coal 
from Cumberland into Washington. The Government has been using 
it. They are talking about abandoning it. There is no question of 
the seamen’s act applying to it; they are just little inland towboats 
and tugs. Yet they are contemplating abandoning the use of that 
little inland canal for some reason. I want to find out all the reasons 
that may be cooperating for the destruction of the waterways trans¬ 
portation and not attributable, arbitrarily, to just one cause, as may 
perhaps be the tendency. I want to see what else there is. 

Mr. Coad. I am very sorry I can not give you the information on 
that point. 

Mr. Chindblom. You do not mean to say, Judge Hardy, there is 
any real relation or comparison between this little artificial ditch, 
built a hundred years ago, and arteries like the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Hardy. No. I mean to say that somehow there is a general 
tendency to abandon water transportation where you can utilize the 
rail. 

Mr. Chindblom. This canal up here was abandoned before the war, 
as 1 understood it, and the Government took it up and paid a sub¬ 
sidy, practically, for running it. 

Mr. Hardy. This canal was abandoned before the war because it 
was leased to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad for $100,000 a year and 
then they let it go down. They owned both the rail and the canal 
and they did not want to do anything, but had to keep it up to cer¬ 
tain limits, and they did so. 

Mr. Davis. So far as you know, is there any direct connection be¬ 
tween the transportation lines and the boat lines on the lakes? 

Mr. Coad. There is absolutely none we know of. 

Mr. Davis. No interlocking directorates? 


30 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 


Mr. Coad. No. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Were the five boats in use during the height of 
our prosperity able to take care of your water freight demands ? 

Mr. Coad. I think so; quite well. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. The three of them are still in operation ? 

Mr. Coad. The three of them are in operation at the present time. 

Mr. Scott. At the height of the season ? 

Mr. Coad. At the height of the season; not during, the winter. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. You never did require more than five? 

Mr. Coad. No. 

Mr. Chindblom. How does your output compare with the volume 
of business you had during the time you had the five boats? 

Mr. Coad. That might be compared with the depression that exists 
all over the country to-day. There are no factories to-day delivering 
anywhere near the volume of business they did formerly. 

Mr. Chindblom. I do not mean the temporary depression now, or 
the condition existing right at this minute; but your facilities for 
producing a volume of business are greater than they were when 
you had the five boats? 

Mr. Coad. Our facilities have increased about 40 per cent and are 
increasing very rapidly. One concern alone is putting up at the 
present time a $14,000,000 improvement. There is an improvement 
going on in the harbor at the present time, and there are about 
$38,000,000 worth of developments just waiting for the time to break. 

Mr. Chindblom. Of course they are all looking forward to normal 
production, and when that time comes you will have a much larger 
output than when you had the five boats? 

Mr. Coad. Larger than we ever had; yes. 

Mr. Free. May I ask the nature of the fruit interests those boats 
would serve ? 

Mr. Coad. I can not give you the volume of that; I can only tell 
you it comprises practically the entire western Michigan fruit belt. 

Mr. Free. What do you grow principally? 

Mr. Coad. Principally grapes, peaches, apples, and pears, and, of 
course, with the potatoes. It is a great potato belt. Frequently 
you will find one man that produces as many of 10,000 bushels of 
potatoes. It is very desirous that those be delivered to the market 
at the time when he can get them there, rather than let them lay 
over for the winter. 

Mr. Hardy. What are the elements that you think enter into the 
unproductiveness of the boat line ? 

Mr. Coad. I think the main element that enters in is the element 
of the extreme requirements on those particular lines on the Great 
Lakes, those short lines, of an unusually large amount of labor that 
it is necessary for them to handle or, rather, as provided for by the 
bill. And the other requirements that go into the bill, like the sup¬ 
plying of certain equipment, which is rather excessive, and the cut¬ 
ting off of the season early and late, and the general provisions that 
make operation more expensive than normally it would be or was 
previous to the bill. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think the requirement of the seamen’s act, 
which requires two watches—is that one of the burdens that you 
think of ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 31 


Mi*. Scott. It requires three watches. 

^ r ‘ ? 0AD * Three watches, as I understand it, sir. 

Mr. Maclean. If I may interrupt. We are here representing the 
general public and the shippers; we are not technical men. The wit¬ 
nesses we will present to you this morning are men who come 
here to tell you we have no ships; that we are likely to have fewer 
ships m certain parts of the Great Lakes than we have had in the 
past. We are here to demand transportation on the lakes. Some¬ 
time this afternoon, or whenever your committee wishes, we may 
some technical men to present, who can answer the questions that 
have been presented to Mr. Coad. 

Mr. Hardy. I will not insist on asking this witness further. I 
understand you present the general condition ? 

Mr. Coad. The general condition; that is all. 

Mr. Davis. I w T ant to ask you whether there was any appreciable 
interruption in this service prior to the time the Government took 
over those two boats, in 1918 ? 

Mr. Coad. I think Mr. Thorp can answer that best. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Thorp, will you answer that question? 

Mr. Thorp. I think most of it has been since that time, although 
there has been a very—well, in 1915, one of the lines went into the 
hands of a receiver and it necessitated reducing the service the fol¬ 
lowing spring to quite a considerable extent. And we did the same 
along about the same time. The boat that was taken by the Gov¬ 
ernment was a boat that was run only during the summer months, 
practically. 

Mr. Davis. I understood Mr. Coad to say that the five boats fur¬ 
nished adequate service and I rather assumed from that there was no 
material interruption in the service prior to the time the Govern¬ 
ment commandeered those two boats. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; there was. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Snell, of New York, is 
here. He is a pretty busy individual and I told him when he came 
in, we would give him a chance to make his statement so that he 
could get away and go back to his work. 

The Chairman. Yes. 

STATEMENT OF HON. B. H. SNELL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK. 

Mr. Snell. I just want about two minutes. I want to appear here 
in the interests of the repeal of the La Follette shipping act as it 
affects the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. I have a very short 
statement to make. 

The largest people in the shipping business in our section, the 
George Hall Coal Co., of Ogdensburg, N. Y., have always main¬ 
tained a fleet of steamers on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. 
At the present time they have 24 boats, 6 of them under the American 
flag and 18 have been transferred to Canadian registry. They would 
very much prefer to keep all their boats under American registry, 
providing they could meet competition as it exists at the present time 
under the laws affecting the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. 


32 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


I would like just to read this short letter and put it in the record, 
as I think it states the case and all that can be said in regard to it: 


Hon. B. H. Snell, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Mr. Snell: I inclose copy of a telegram received from the secretary 
of the seaman’s act conference in reference to a bill before Congress, together 
with a copy of my reply. 

We are very much interested in this matter and would be greatly obliged if 
you would assist in remedying what we believe is a great detriment to American 
shipping on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River due to the La Folletie 
seaman’s act, and we earnestly urge the repeal or modification of that act 
which has resulted in great injury to American shipping on the Great Lakes 
and St. Lawrence River, for the reason that, under that act, St. Lawrence 
River steamers are unable to compete with Canadian boats of the same size. 
The result is, most of the boats on the river are now operating under Canadian 
registry. We now have only 6 American boats, while 18 have been transferred 
to the Canadian flag. 

Yours, very truly, 


Edward L. Q. Strong, 

Vice President and Treasurer. 


I think, Mr. Chairman, that states the situation as it exists in our 
section of the State—that practically all of our boats have been trans¬ 
ferred to Canadian registry for the reason stated. 

Mr. Davis. Between what points does that company operate? 

Mr. Snell, They operate largely on Lake Erie and clear down 
through to Montreal. 

Mr. Hardy. Has Canada any law preventing the transfer to her 
flaof of boats built in the United States ? 

Mr. Snell. I did not quite understand the question. 

Mr. Hardy. Does Canada permit the free registry under her flag 
of United States built boats? 

Mr. Snell. I can not give you that information, but it seems they 
must have done so. 

Mr. Hardy. It seems to be a situation where our boats can go and 
find registry anywhere they please. 

Mr. Snell. I could not tell you what the law is on that. 

Mr. Roseneloom. Do you know whether all those 24 boats had 
been, at one time, under American registry? 

Mr. Snell. I think all of them have been, but some of them have 
been transferred lately. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How lately? 

Mr. Snell. Here is the situation: They sold all of their boats dur¬ 
ing the war and whether the new boats they put back have ever been 
under the American flag or not I could not sav. But they would 
have been under the American flag if the law had been such they 
would have been able to compete. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Can you get us the information? 

Mr. Scott. I will give you that information. The representative 
of the Rochester Chamber of Commerce is here to supplement the 
statement of Mr. Snell. Mr. Snell told you before the war this com¬ 
pany had a large n umber of ships operating on Lake Ontario and at 
that time they had ships under American registry and now they have 
transferred all of them to Canadian registry, and I thought that 
would be valuable information to have before the committee. 

Mr. Maclean. I had intended to call on a representative of the 
Eastern part of Michigan to state the conditions there, but as Mr. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 33 


Snell has introduced his subject at this particular time, I will call 
on Mr. E. C. Crockett, representing the Rochester Chamber of Com¬ 
merce, of Rochester, N. Y. 

STATEMENT OF MR. E. C. CROCKETT, ROCHESTER, N. Y., REPRE¬ 
SENTING THE ROCHESTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. Crockett. The situation on Lake Ontario is this, as Congress¬ 
man Snell has said, that practically all of the G. B. Hall steamers, 
that are coal carriers, have shifted from American registry to 
Canadian registry. They have done it because it is more economical 
to operate under Canadian registry than under the conditions of the 
La Follette Act. 

Mr. Briggs. May I interrupt the witness a moment: Will you 
tell, briefly, in just what respects? 

Mr. Crockett. I think I will come to that more naturally as I 
proceed. We have out of the port of Rochester car ferry steamers 
that cross from Rochester to Cobourg in Ontario. They carry 500 
tons of coal annually. They are owned one half by American 
capital and the other half by Canadian capital. They are both 
under Canadian registry. 

Mr. Chindblom. 500 tons? 

Mr. Crockett. They carry 500,000 tons, one-half million tons, 
from the port of Rochester to Cobourg and they bring back partial 
cargoes. 

Mr. Chindblom. Do they each carry that much? 

Mr. Crockett. No; the two of them. The business of the port, 
of those two car ferries, is half a million tons of coal annually. The 
G. B. Hall Co. steamers carry more than a million tons of coal from 
the port of Rochester down this St. Lawrence River, as Congressman 
Snell said. Their boats practically are all under Canadian registry. 
Out of the port of Rochester go 100,000 passengers, in and out, across 
Lake Ontario and down the river St. Lawrence. They are all 
carried by boats under the Canadian flag and owned by Canadian 
capital. That company, a number of years ago, probably 10 years 
ago, built a boat at Detroit so as to have one of their passenger boats 
under the American flag so she could operate. 

Mr. Hardy. Are all the rest of them built in Canada. 

Mr. Crockett. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Only the one built in America ?' 

Mr. Crockett. Only one of the passenger steamers built in 
America. 

Mr. Hardy. These vessels you are talking about being under 
Canadian registry: Were they built in Canada or America? 

Mr. Crockett. The two car ferries were built in Canada with 
American capital. 

Mr. Hardy. They are not allowed to register? 

Mr. Crockett. They would have been built, all things being equal, 
in America. At least one of them would have been built in America, 
all things being equal. 

Mr. Hardy. When was that boat built? 

48420—21-3 


34 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Crockett. The second one went into service about the begin¬ 
ning of the war. The other one had been in service probably four 
or five years before the war. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think they would have been built in America 
when the cost of building in America was very much in excess of 
that in England and Canada ? 

Mr. Crockett. The Canadian Steamship Co. built one of her 
large passenger steamers in this country. 

Mr. Hardy. Because she had to, to get the American registry. 

Mr. Crockett. She had to, to get the American registry; but since 
that time they have turned her back to Canadian registry. 

Mr. Hardy. So that being built in America is no bar to registering 
under the Canadian law at the present time ? 

Mr. Crockett. I do not think so. 

Mr. Hardy. But being built in Canada would be a bar against 
being registered in America, under the American flag? 

Mr. Crockett. I do not understand that. 

Mr. Hardy. You understand that under our laws, with the excep¬ 
tion of some exceptions recently incorporated in the law, no vessel 
can fly the American flag unless built in the United States ? 

Mr. Crockett. But w T e have, Congressman, a boat in the port of 
Rochester and operating out of the port of Rochester that last year 
was bought from Canada and at that time was under Canadian 
registry. She was a Canadian registered boat. She was transferred 
from Canada to the port of Rochester and her registry was changed 
from Canadian to American. 

Mr. Hardy. She is liable to run across a snag before long. 

Mr. Crockett. She did run against a snag. The first thing they 
had to do was to increase the crew and put on a fireman, although 
they were going out on trips that were not more than three and a 
half miles at the outside, and never going out more than 3 miles 
from shore, and their entire operation being in the daytime and 
never a whole day of more than 8 hours. The first thing they 
had to do was to increase their crew of firemen to 3, so they would 
have to carry an extra fireman, although they did not have anything 
for him to do. And the other thing they had to do was, with a crew 
of 7 men and having aboard a lifeboat for 10 men, they had to dis¬ 
card the lifeboat for 7 men and get a lifeboat for 15 men. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Crockett, can you tell approximately the percent¬ 
age of American citizens who are employed on those boat lines? 

Mr. Crockett. No; I have no figures at all on that. I know that 
on those Canadian passenger steamers there is quite a portion of 
their crews obtained along the St. Lawrence River, at Clayton and 
Alexandria Bay; but what proportion, I do not know. 

Mr. Davis. You understand that part of them are American citi¬ 
zens and part of them are foreign citizens ? 

Mr. Crockett. I know only casually; I have no figures. I simply 
know casually they apportion their crews they get along the River 
St. Lawrence. 

Mr. Chindblom. When they were compelled to increase their crew, 
they were not compelled to take American citizens in their crews 
were they? 

Mr. Davis. No, I do not understand that; but I just wanted to 
get at the figures. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 35 

Mr. Chindblom. I think I sympathize with your purpose. I am 
simply bringing out that there is no requirement that they be Ameri¬ 
can citizens; they are simply required to increase their crew. 

Mr. Davis. 1 know. In other words, my idea was to find out what 
percentage were Americans and what percentage of foreigners were 
permitted by the La Follette Seaman’s Act. 

Mr. Crockett. Of course what we are interested in on Lake Ontario, 
and Rochester particularly, is to get the American flag on Lake 
Ontario and to keep it there. We do not like to see these G. B. 
Hall steamers, 24 of them, all come into port, all owned by American 
capital, coming in flying the British flag. 

Mr. Davis. I think it is a very laudable purpose. 

Mr. Crockett. And Ave believe the La Follette Act should be 
modified, particularly so far as the Great Lakes are concerned, so 
that a condition would be brought about where American capital can 
be invested in America’s interest. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. You are familar with the boats of the G. B. 
Hall Line are you? 

Mr. Crockett. I see them. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Were they at any time under American registry? 

Mr. Crockett. Most of them; yes. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How recently have they been changed; since the 
passage of this act ? 

Mr. Crockett. My information is three years ago they made the 
big change. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Do you know how many of them by reason of the 
La Follette Act ? 

Mr. Crockett. I do not know accurately. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Could you estimate it? 

Mr. Crockett. I simply was informed, within a few days, by an 
official of the coal company from which they get their coal that gives 
them the million tons of coal, that they have shifted them all within 
three years—between two and three years ago they shifted them. 

Mr. Hardy. In 1917 or 1918? 

Mr. Crockett. That was his statement. 

Mr. Hardy. Three years from now would be 1918. If it was within 
that, it would be a year and a half after the passage of the La Follette 
Act. 

Mr. Briggs. What became of the vessel you referred to just now as 
having changed its registry from Canadian to American; and com¬ 
plied with those requirements; did she keep her American registry ? 

Mr. Crockett. She went back to Canadian registry. She is owned 
by the same people, and is operating in the St. Lawrence River. I 
know the Buffalo Chamber of Commerce have chartered her for their 
cruise for this year, which takes place about the 20th of June; so 
that she is still "operating on the Great Lakes, but is operating as a 
Canadian boat. 

Mr. Chindblom. How long was she operating under Canadian reg¬ 
istry ? 

Mr. Crockett. I would say up to about three years ago. 

Mr. Chindblom. Then she was only under American registry for 
two or three years ? 


36 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Crockett. Oh, she was operating longer than that. She must 
be 12 or 14 years old. She was built at Detroit, and she was first 
known as the City of Rochester. 

Mr. Chindblom. The La Follette Act was approved in 1915, as I 
recall, so that the conditions created by the La Follette Act would 
not have existed prior to that time. 

Mr. Crockett. You mean that would be an additional reason for 
them to put her at that time under Canadian registry ? 

Mr. Chindblom. No; I am just trying to get the facts; I am not 
arguing the proposition. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. With the Canadian registry, do those boats op¬ 
erate a bar—those passenger steamers ? 

Mr. Crockett. I beg pardon ? 

Mr. Kosenbloom. Does the Canadian registration allow those boats 
to operate a bar three miles out ? 

Mr. Crockett. I do not know whether they do; but none of those 
Canadian boats operate a bar now, and have not for years. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. The passenger steamers? 

Mr. Crockett. They have not for years. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I 
again wish to repeat we are not presenting to you men who can go 
into the technicalities regarding how the ships are run. We are 
presenting men to you who haie come here to say to you that we need 
ships, and that we have not the ships, that we need more ships than 
we have had in the past. Many of those ships are off service; others 
are in the hands of receivers and others are tending in that direction. 
It is a condition that confronts us. We are here, Mr. Chairman, not 
as representing the vessel men; we are here representing the public. 
We are representing the shippers; we are representing men who 
want ships, and not men who own and run them. You have heard 
what the condition is in western Michigan. I want you, Mr. Chair¬ 
man and gentlemen, to know the conditions in eastern Michigan, in 
that great farming country along the shores of Lake Huron. And 
I will call on Mr. G. J. Jenks, who is here from Harbor Beach. 

STATEMENT OE MR. GEORGE J. JENKS, HARBOR BEACH, MICH., 
MILLING AND MERCANTILE BUSINESS. 

Mr. Jenks. I represent Harbor Beach, which is located in the 
thumb of Michigan. You gentlemen who have looked at the lower 
peninsula of Michigan on the map have noticed that the peninsula 
juts out into Lake Huron, which is known as the thumb, I live in 
Huron County, which is one of the largest counties in the State in 
area—about 30 miles north .and south and, roughly, 40 miles east 
and west. This country was lumbered in the sixties and seventies 
and then settlers came in. They found the soil rather light. This 
town of Harbor Beach, where I live, was originally called Sand 
Beach. Consequently, they turned to truck farming, small fruits, 
and potatoes. 

At that time, in the seventies, when the farming industry started 
in our section, we had no rail transportation whatever, but were 
served by several lines of small steamers. These called in at all the 
little towns from Port Huron, north. This town where I live is 60 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 37 


miles north of Port Huron by water and 130 miles north of Detroit. 
Some time in the eighties a railroad was built, a narrow-gauge rail¬ 
road, and going through our rather isolated location. We are on 
the stub end of a branch line of that railroad. At some time in the 
eighties, I think, the Detroit and Cleveland Navigation Co. put on 
two very fine steamers, or what were considered fine steamers in 
those days. They ran, as I remember them, for six months in the 
year. They furnished us very fine service. The section became 
highly developed agriculturally. I think it is one of the most pros¬ 
perous sections in the United States. The little town where I live, 
of about 2,000 inhabitants, is the marketing and shipping section 
for the east half of this large county. I think the county has about 
35,000 inhabitants, and we probably serve a third to a half of them 
directly and indirectly all of them in the way of passenger service, 
since we have gotten good roads. These people come to Harbor 
Beach from all over the county and other counties south, as Plarbor 
Beach is the only stopping point now of the Detroit and Cleveland 
Navigation Co. between Detroit and Alpena. 

Our railroad service is so inadequate, from the fact we are served 
by only one railroad, which goes down to a junction point 18 miles 
south of Harbor Beach and then runs northwest about 90 miles to 
Saginaw, Mich., and then drops down to Detroit from there. If the 
rates were such we could ship our fruit by express, they might serve 
us to some extent, but they could not possibly give us the service 
the boats have given us. For example, previous to last year we had 
four boats; that is, four days in the week we had boat service each 
way, Detroit to Mackinaw. A farmer would bring in his fruit dur¬ 
ing the shipping season early in the morning and would get a boat 
leaving there at 8 o’clock, which would land the fruit in Detroit 
about 3 o’clock in the afternoon and in Cleveland or Buffalo the 
next morning—water transportation, cool, under cover, under the 
very best conditions, at one-third the expense of express shipments. 

In the fall season, and as we are rather far north and surrounded 
by water, we have a late spring, our potatoes come into the market 
very late, at the time when the very inadequate facilities of the rail¬ 
road are taken up with hay and grain shipments, it is almost im¬ 
possible to get cars for potatoes at that time. Our great markets, 
of course, are Detroit and Cleveland, and Buffalo which, as I have 
told you, we reach in less than 24 hours into Buffalo. A year ago 
last winter, the Detroit & Cleveland Navaigation Co. notified us as 
we were one of the best shipping points on Their line, that they 
expected to continue our service another year in the hope that busi¬ 
ness would pick up to such an extent that they could continue it 
indefinitely as they had for approximately the last 30 years. 

Iam ashamed to say so, but that is the first time I had ever heard 
of the seamen’s act. 'I had probably read of it incidentally in the 
newspapers, but I had no idea what it meant to our community. 
I went down to Detroit and consulted the officers of the line, and 
they told me that, owing to some of the provisions of this act, they 
were unable to operate the boat as they had done previously, but 
they would give us much better service. They had taken a few of 
the* best shipping points and the best passenger points on the eastern 
shore of Michigan, and they said they were going to give us a six-day 


38 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 


service. That is, instead of a four-day service, that we would have 
a six-day service—a boat every day in the week but one. They felt 
by increasing the service 50 per cent, with the same crew, that even 
under the very adverse conditions—which they explained to me, but 
which I do not understand, as I am not a boatman—they might be 
able to continue. 

I took the story home with me, and our little chamber of commerce 
and our farm bureau and our grange which works with it took the 
matter up, and some of the farmers said, “Oh, I guess that is just 
a bluff; they want to raise the freight rates on us, and I guess that 
will be a good excuse, so they are telling us a hard-luck story.” But 
this winter they notified us they were down; it was impossible for 
them to operate except at a loss, and unless they could be relieved 
to some extent—such relief as is being asked for in this amendment 
to this law—our transportation would be discontinued. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me ask you right there: If your freight rates were 
even doubled, I understood you to say, by boat you carry your goods 
for about one-third what you carry them by rail ? 

Mr. Jenks. I compared them with express, sir. We could not ship 
our fruits by freight from Harbor Beach to Detroit or Buffalo. 

Mr. Hardy. You have to ship by express or boat ? 

Mr. Jenks. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Suppose they doubled your rates, it would still be 
cheaper than by express, would it not ? 

Mr. Jenks. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You think the burden of this act is so great that if 
they doubled the freight rates they still could not live under the 
seaman’s act? 

Mr. Jenks. The fruits are perishable products, sold at very high 
prices and only shipped at short seasons of the year. I doubt if the 
revenue from that and a very big season of potatoes which I used 
to ship by boat during the fall season up until nearly the 1st of 
December—those potatoes come into competition, of course, with 
comparatively low freight rates from other sections. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not a fact the railroads never reduce their rates 
below water competitive rates, unless they are for the moment try¬ 
ing to drive competition off of the water? 

Mr. Jenks. I could not tell you, sir. 

Mr. Scott. In order that the committee may have a general idea 
as to the extent of the business in your comparatively srpall section 
of the State in comparison with the balance of the State, I wish you 
would tell the committee what your business in potatoes alone was 
there for one year. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Pardon an interruption right at this point, but 
I believe you stated that the first notice you had from the D. & C. 
Line was only a year ago? 

Mr. Jenks. That is the first notice I had personally; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That unless business picked up, there would be 
a change in the schedule. 

Mr. Jenks. They notified us there would be a change in the sched¬ 
ule and they had cut out the towns that were not productive and 
they felt by increasing the service 50 per cent they could make it 
pay. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 39 


Mr. Rosenbloom. So that after having operated under the act 
for five years without any inconvenience, and it was based upon 
business picking up, you received your first notice? 

Mr. Scott. That is not quite accurate. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I would not say whether it is accurate. I am 
just reviewing his statement. That is why I want him to correct it 
right now. I think if you will examine the record, you will find 
that statement made. 

Mr. Scott. The trouble is this, the operators on the lakes in 
reality only operated under the La Follette or seamen's act, prior to 
the war, for a period of one year, and even during that period, in 
opposition to the position taken by the opponents of the bill, some 
very favorable decisions were made by the Department of Commerce 
in a contended direct opposition to the provisions of the law. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I understand. But the gentleman who appears 
here as a witness- 

Mr. Scott. I think you are right. 

Mr. Rosenbloom (continuing) States that it was just this winter, 
a year ago, he was notified there was anything wrong, and then it 
was stated by the management “ Unless business conditions im¬ 
proved.” 

Mr. Davis. What proportion of increase in rates did they advise 
they would be compelled to make unless they were given some relief 
from the provisions of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Jenks. As I understand it, sir—you understand I am not a 
steamboat man. 

Mr. Davis. I am simply asking you as a business man. 

Mr. Jenks. This question is complicated with some other consid¬ 
erations. It is not a question of freight alone; it is a question of 
passenger service as well as freight. Those boats could not operate 
on freight alone; they are too big; they are too valuable, as I under¬ 
stand it. Now the provisions of the seamen’s act, as it has been 
explained to me are these- 

Mr. Davis. Before you go to that: I understood you to say that 
when you visited them in Detroit, they advised you they Avere con¬ 
templating cutting out the small unproductive points, in which e\ r ent 
they w T ould be able to make your port six days a week instead of 
four, but would Avant an increased rate, and that you returned and 
discussed the matter with your local people and they thought it Avas 
simply an effort to pry up rates. 

Mr. Jenks. I had no notification of an advance ip rates, sir. Noth¬ 
ing Avas said about rates. 

Mr. Daais. There was no specific mention of rates? 

Mr. Jenks. No, sir. If I made any such statement, it was inac¬ 
curate. 

Mr. Daais. I understood you to say your local people thought at 
that time it Avas simply an effort to pry up rates. 

Mr. Jenks. Exactly. 

Mr. Davis. But they never did advise you what rates would be 
charged ? 

Mr. Jenks. It Avas not a question of rates at all. As I started to 
explain, in my opinion, they could not operate those boats on freight 
alone. It Avas a question of passenger service as well. 


40 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 


Mr. Davis. I presume it would contemplate an increase in pas¬ 
senger rates as well as freight. 

Mr. Jenks. I think they did increase the rates. I think as their 
expenses increased during the war they did increase the rates in the 
same ratio as the railroads increased their rates. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not a fact if they get the rates high enough and 
get business enough, it would not make any difference how much 
expense they would have to pay, they could run the boats ? 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That is true in any business. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Jenks. I third?: we would have to concede that, sir, provided 
the conditions hold out. 

Mr. Hardy. Then what I want to know is if they have found it 
necessary to charge above the railroad rates in order to pay ex¬ 
penses— 

Mr. Jenks. They could not get the business. 

Mr. Hardy. Could they get it if they charged only slightly less 
than the railroad rates? 

Mr. Jenks. In our particular isolated sections they could. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to get at is whether it is some complaint 
of this law they want amended, that would drive them out of busi¬ 
ness, or a lack of business. 

Mr. Jenks. It certainly is not a lack of business. The business is 
there and always has been. They have lost their business, and I think 
to some extent I understand why they have lost it. 

Mr. Hardy. The general understanding is where railroads have 
been built to serve a community they have driven water competition 
off long before the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Jenks. That is not true in our section. It is not true in east¬ 
ern Michigan, nor is it true in western Michigan. 

Mr. Hardy. Might it not be true on the Lakes ? 

Mr. Jenks. It is not true in our section. 

Mr. Hardy. The railroads have the lowest rates on the Lakes of 
anywhere in the United States, I think. 

Mr. Maclean. We have a gentleman here representing the Port 
Huron Chamber of Commerce who has had experience in all lines of 
vessel work, and I would like Capt. Crosby, of Port Huron, to be 
heard at this time. 

STATEMENT OF CAPT. W. J. CROSBY, REPRESENTING THE CHAM¬ 
BER OF COMMERCE OF THE CITY OF PORT HURON. 

Capt. Crosby. I want to say at the present time I am President and 
general manager of the Nipigon Transit Co., and also the North 
Shore Transit Co. We operate a line of pulp-wood boats. Prior to 
the passage of the seamen’s act in 1915, we operated the steamer 
Ford , a vessel of 609 tons gross capacity, with a crew of IB men. 
After the passage of the seamen’s act we were compelled to carry a 
crew of 17 men. Those four extra men, for whom we had entirely 
no use, will cost that little vessel for maintenance and wages this 
season a trifle over $5,000. 

Mr. Briggs. A season? 

Capt. Crosby. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. The season on the Great Lakes is how long? About 
six months? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 41 


Capt. Crosby. We operate in the pulp-wood trade about 210 to 
225 days. Under present conditions we can not compete with the 
Canadian boats in the same trade. 

Mr. Hardy. Right there, will you let me ask you a question? In 
the seamen’s act I see this proviso: Provided, that foreign vessels 
leaving ports of the United States shall comply with the rules herein 
prescribed as to life-saving appliances, their equipment and the man¬ 
ning of same. If that law is enforced won’t Canadian boats operat¬ 
ing to American ports have to have the same amount of service you 
have? 

Capt. Crosby. No, sir. They are not compelled by law to carry 
any more of a crew than the officers of that Canadian vessel deem 
necessary. 

Mr. Hardy. That is a proviso of the law I have just read to you— 
they are required to be equipped and manned just like an American 
boat if they trade into an American harbor. 

Capt. Crosby. That is not so. They do not do that. If that is the 
law it is not enforced. 

Mr. Hardy. I just wanted to know about that. 

Capt. Crosby. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. You are referring to combination boats, both passen¬ 
ger and freight, or just freight? 

Capt. Crosby. Just freight. I am just talking about this particular 
type of boat. I am not going to say regarding the Port Huron 
Chamber of Commerce and the way it affects them. Mr. Keefer, the 
president, is here and will talk on that point, and I will just say to 
the committee the conditions on which we are operating for pulp 
wood and similar classes of tonnage. 

Mr. Davis. Are there any other features of the seamen’s act that 
you find unduly burdensome except the one requiring additional 
personnel ? 

Capt. Crosby. Yes. We find the seamen’s act irksome in the 
smaller class of tonnage, because our run—if we go to the Soo River 
for pulp wood, about 24 hours, we are in port four to six days 
loading. We can not use the coal passers; they are not allowed to 
do any work loading. They can go fishing or anything else, but we 
have no use for that extra fireman. And the conditions generally are 
a little bit irksome for the master. The men are continually asking 
for their time, and all that sort of thing. 

Mr. Davis. You mean the hours? 

Capt. Crosby. The hours; yes, sir. We can not work them loading. 

Mr. Davis. Do you find the requirement as to seamen’s quarters 
irksome or not? 

Capt, Crosby. No, sir. I have filled every position on a boat from 
deckhand to master and am now in the council of management, and 
I do not believe in mistreating any sailor. I believe in feeding him 
well and treating him well—good food and good quarters—they are 
entitled to that—and good wages. 

Mr. Davis. You do not consider the requirements of the seamen’s 
act in those respects unduly burdensome or unjust? 

Capt. Crosby. On the smaller class of tonnage, I would say this, 
that the housing conditions are not as good for the extra men as I 
would like to see them on the smaller boat, because they take up 
cargo space, and they are not any better housed than they should be. 


42 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think a boat ought to be permitted to go out 
with less than two watches for a 16-hour run or a 15-hour run? 

Capt. Crosby. Two watches is fine, Congressman. I believe all 
vessels covering a run of 16 hours should have two watches. 

Mr. Hardy. How about a 15-hour or a 12-hour run. 

Capt. Crosby. A 12-hour run—it would depend on the size of the 
boat or between what points she was operating. 

Mr. Hardy. A man would not be very spry if you kept him on 
watch for more than 12 hours, would he? 

Capt. Crosby. No, not for more than 12 hours. That would be 
a hardship. 

Mr. Hardy. This bill only requires two watches in cases of 16 
hours or more. Is not that, even under your view, stretching the 
law a little? 

Capt. Crosby. No; I do not think so. In the old days, when I 
graduated, we had a six on and six off watch. I like that; I think 
it is fine. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that two watches? 

Capt. Crosby. Two watches, Congressman, on the smaller class of 
tonnage. 

Mr. Hardy. You would want at least tw T o watches, would you not? 

Capt. Crosby. At least two watches on boats, yes, depending on the 
size of the vessel and where she was operating. 

Mr. Free. Tell us the other objectionable features of the act. 

Capt. Crosby. I have told you of the three-watch system on the 
small boat. I believe that the extra watch there is a menace to the 
safety of the small boat. We have not the housing conditions, and 
in case of fire or anything else like that, an accident, they are simply 
in the way in getting the boats away. They are just like passengers. 
Take the coal passer, he is not a sailor; a deck hand usually is not 
a sailor. They are landlubbers, you know. 

Mr. Davis. Do you employ American citizens altogether, or partly 
American and partly foreign ? 

Capt. Crosby. We usually employ American citizens, but it it very 
hard to determine, Congressman. The Canadians are all good sail¬ 
ors. It is very hard on the Great Lakes to determine who is an 
American and who is a Canadian. They are practically all Cana¬ 
dians and Americans on the Great Lakes, and there are a few Nor¬ 
wegians. 

Mr. Davis. Are there any Chinamen on your ships of any conse¬ 
quence that are employed in the traffic on the Great Lakes, as far as 
you know T ? 

Capt. Crosby. I was 35 years a master of a steamboat, and I never 
saw T a Chinaman on a Lake vessel. I am speaking of the Lakes 
only—the five Great Lakes. 

Mr. Bbiggs. I w T ould like to ask you with reference to the seccess 
of the American vessels as compared with the Canadian vessels. 
Under what conditions do Canadian ships operate, as to size of the 
crews, as compared with American ships of the same tonnage—the 
same class of vessels ? 

Capt. Crosby. Both Canadian boats of the same size of the J . C. 
Ford operate with five and six less men. And they do not pay within 
about 20 per cent of the wages—the Canadian boats. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 43 

Mr. Briggs. In spite of that fact, have your boats been operating 
at a profit until recently, since the passage of this act ? 

Capt. Crosby. We paid a little income tax in 1917. Last year we 
broke just about even or a little to the bad, and this year we expect 
to go under Canadian registry if we can not get some redress at this 
conference. 

Mr. Briggs. How many vessels do you operate ? 

Capt. Crosby. In the pulp-Avood trade we operate two. 

Mr. Briggs. And in other trades ? 

Capt. Crosby. We have an American tug which I have transferred 
to Canadian registry, and that is about the size of our fleet. 

Mr. Briggs. Is it a question of business or a question of conditions 
under which you operate with respect to the seamen’s act? In other 
words, is the business holding up or is it falling off? 

Capt. Crosby. I understand from the people we are contracted 
with that the paper business has fallen off to such an extent that 
they asked for bids to carry their pulp wood and the Canadians 
offered to carry it for $3.50, and we can not meet that under present 
conditions. It is absolutely impossible to do it. 

Mr. Davis. How do the wages per man, paid by the Canadian 
operators, compare with the wages paid by you American operators 
in the same employment ? 

Capt. Crosby. It will mean about $35 per month per man differ¬ 
ence in the able-seamen and fire-hold departments. 

Mr. Davis. You mean the American operators pay about $35 
more ? 

Capt. Crosby. The American sailor will get about 25 to 30 per 
cent more than the Canadian sailor. 

Mr. Davis. Do you think there is any difference in the efficiency 
of the two? 

Capt. Crosby. No ; I think the best sailors on the Great Lakes are 
the Canadians and the Americans. There is no difference between 
the two classes. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you not allowed to employ the Canadian just as 
readily as the American? There is no law to prevent your having 
a Canadian crew is there ? 

Capt. Crosby. No; no more than the fact that the seamen and 
firemen, the Americans, are pretty well organized and we do not 
want any trouble. They have been fairly good to us in a way, and 
we have to pay the wages to operate our boats. 

Mr. Hardy. That is a question of a failure to agree with the labor 
you have, instead of a question of the seamen’s law, is it not? 

Capt. Crosby. No. 

Mr. Hardy. The seamen’s law does not require you to employ 
Americans? 

Capt. Crosby. No ; but the seamen’s law compels me to carry men 
that are useless to us—absolutely useless. 

Mr. Hardy. You spoke of the difference in wages, 25 to 30 per 
cent difference in wages, that adds $30 per month to the American 
seaman’s wages. But you can go and employ Canadians with per¬ 
fect freedom under the seamen’s law ? 

Capt. Crosby. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, I ask you if the seamen’s law is causing th* 
difference in wages? 


44 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Capt. Crosby. I would not say that; no. 

Mr. Hardy. So that that complaint does not lies against the sea* 
men’s law ? 

Capt. Crosby. No. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. If you were not compelled to employ an excess 
number of men, in your opinion, could you then operate at a profit 
and still pay the same wage you are now paying; that is, a greater 
wage than the Canadian boat pays ? If that one provision there were 
eliminated, would you still be able to pay this increased wage? 

Capt. Crosby. I think we would sooner pay it than change our 
registry. We could come to some agreement with the unions if it 
was not for the excess men. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That is of more hindrance to your successful 
operation than the difference in wage? 

Capt. Crosby. Yes, sir. We would like to come under rigid 
United States inspection regarding equipment and all that sort of 
thing. 

Mr. Brtggs. How do the wages for the American, for similar serv¬ 
ice, compare with those paid to the Canadian? 

Capt. Crosby. About 20 to 25 per cent more. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean in dollars and cents. if you can estimate it, for 
similar positions. 

Capt. Crosby. The wages last year on American boats were $125 
a month. 

Mr. Briggs. For what? 

Capt. Crosby. For the able seamen and firemen. I am talking 
about the able seamen and firemen when I refer to the wage scale. 

Mr. Free. Is that with or without board? 

Capt. Crosby. With their maintenance, of course. And on Ca¬ 
nadian boats they were getting all the way from $85 to. $90, not 
more than $90, from our competitors in the pulp-wood and lumber 
business. 

Mr. Davis. Are the Canadian seamen in a union organization ? 

Capt. Crosby. I understand they were organizing the Canadian 
sailors last winter, this past winter. 

Mr. Davis. If you employ a Canadian seaman are you compelled 
to pay him the same wages jmu pay the Americans on board ? 

Capt. Crosby. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Davis. The union requires that that be done ? 

Capt. Crosby. If we carry union men, why, of course, they require 
that we pay union wages. 

Mr. Briggs. Was there a strike of the Canadian seamen on the 
Lakes last summer ? 

Capt. Crosby. There was; yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Was that an organization strike or individual? 

Capt. Crosby. They went back as individuals. I was in Port 
Arthur at the time the strike was settled. I do not understand who 
ordered it or whether they were organized over there, but anyway 
I do not think they made anything by the strike. 

Mr. Maclean. Capt. Crosby will be at your command at a later 
date for any further inquiry that you desire. As far as the interests 
we represent are concerned, we do not care whether the seamen’s 
union, the American Federation of Labor, or anybody else runs these 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13-, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 45 

ships. If the American Federation of Labor is in a position to run 
these ships under the navigation laws, for God’s sake let them do it. 
We want transportation. 

Mr. Davis. You understand the members of the committee want 
to get all the facts and from different points of view ? 

Mr. Maclean. I appreciate that; but we do not care who runs 
the ships. We want ships. We have now no ships on the American 
line between Detroit and Mackinaw, and we want some. Just what 
the differences are we are not here to say. We have not got the 
ships, and if the American Federation of Labor wants to run the 
two ships from Detroit to Mackinaw, we want them to do it; or if 
any one can do it, we want them to do it. We are here to explain 
what the conditions are. We are up against it. And we will hear 
from Mr. M. L. Miller, who represents the fruit growers of Put 
in Bay, Ohio. 

STATEMENT OF ME. M. L. MILLEE, EEPEESENTING THE FETJIT 
GEOWEES ON PUT IN BAY, OHIO. 

Mr. Miller. I represent the fruit growers on Put in Bay, which 
is one of the islands of the Lake Erie; archipelago, the principal 
islands of which are North and Middle Bass, Kelleys, Put in Bay, 
and Catawba. These islands lie off the Ohio shore, are part of the 
State of Ohio, and have a population of approximately 2,000 people. 

All along the Ohio shore the principal industry is raising fruit, 
and the regions of the Ohio shore are in practically the same posi¬ 
tion as far as the handling of their fruit is concerned as the islanders, 
with the one exception, that they are on the mainland and can, by 
long hauls, ship their fruit by the railroads. The growers on the 
island are entirely dependent on the boat service; we have no rail¬ 
roads. We have no way whatever of transporting our fruit except 
by boat. 

For a period, going back approximately 50 years, these islands 
have been served during the spring and fall by the Ashley & Dustin 
Line of Detroit, which is operating a boat from Detroit to Sandusky, 
direct from all these various islands, handling freight and carrying 
our produce to the market. 

The principal fruit raised on these islands consists of grapes and 
peaches. There are also pears, apples, and plums, but they are not 
a majority. The principal fruits are grapes and peaches, and the 
peach market is and always has been Detroit. The reason for that 
is that Canada has very little fruit production. There are practically 
no peach orchards of consequence in Canada near Detroit. For that 
reason Detroit has been an exceptional peach market, because 
approximately half of our peaches go across into Canada. 

As I said before, for 50 years this boat line has been serving this 
district and, as a consequence, the development has taken place 
around the boat service. We have depended on the boat service to 
handle fruits and have naturally built up our orchards, assuming 
that service would always continue. Last year the Ashley & Dustin 
people withdrew the boat that had been giving the spring and fall 
service, named the Frankie Kirby , and stated as their reason that 
in the season of 1919 they grossed $19,000 more than they ever did 


46 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

before, but showed a loss of $9,000. That was their statement. 
And they attributed it directly to the cost of operation of their 
boat. We tried every means available at our hands to induce them 
to put this boat back, but they said, “ No; the seamen’s law is respon¬ 
sible for this loss, and inasmuch as it is not changed, we can not 
put our boat back in the service.” We are therefore up against it 
for a way to transport our fruit to market. 

It ran along into the summer. We had absolutely no way of an}^ 
kind and could get no boat and we tried all summer long. Various 
delegations went all over the country trying to get a boat to handle 
this fruit. We offered freight rates that seemed prohibitive, but it 
was a case of life or death and we had to do it. Finally we got an 
old wrecking tug that Avas fixed up and, with what we considered a 
very high freight rate, carried our fruit to the market last fall, but 
in a very unsatisfactory manner. Hundreds of bushels of peaches 
were lost by our officials because of the water that splashed over 
the side of the boat, and these peaches were carried on open decks, 
absolutely open to the weather, and the boat was so slow she could 
not make the time; she could not get down there and back in time 
to handle the peaches before they started to deteriorate. 

We are in the same condition to-day. We can not rely on that boat 
again, because we had an exceptional season last fall, and everybody 
realizes if it had been bad weather we would have been losers. 
Therefore, we ask this committee to give us some assistance 

I have here a petition I would like to present as part of the record. 
I will read it: 

We, the undersigned, fruit growers and shippers of the islands Put in Bay 
North and Middle Bass, Kelleys, and Catawba, in Lake Erie, do hereby petition 
your honorable body for relief from the present act of Congress known as the 
La Follette seaman’s law, many of the provisions of which serve, because of 
their undue severity as regards shipping on the Great Lakes, to deprive us of 
the larger part of the boat service upon which we depend for our very existence. 

The perishable nature of our fruits and produce, which aggregate annually 
more than $1,500,000, demands quick and adequate service in moving them to 
market. Two of the three steamers which in past years have served these 
islands have been d'scontinued, and the schedule of the third has been curtailed, 
owing directly to the effect of the seamen’s law. And, moreover, as a result 
of the same law, freight rates have been mounting steadily, until they have 
reached virtually a prohibitive point. 

We hereby indorse the recommendations of the “ Seamen’s Act Conferences ” 
held at the Detroit Board of Commerce, Detroit, Mich., April 8 and 9. 1921, 
for the purpose of expressing the sentiment of the Great Lakes district in 
connection with revision of the seamen’s law. 

This petition is signed by over 300 growers and producers of 
fruit on those islands. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the distance from your islands to Detroit? 

Mr. Miller. 60 miles. 

Mr. Hardy. Are not your water rates cheaper than any railroad 
rates from inland countries equally distant? 

Mr. Miller. I can not answer you that, but we pay 42 cents a 
bushel for peaches. That includes dockage and freight. Of course 
the docks at both ends charge us dockage. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think it is possible that transportation by 
boat under the seaman’s law is greater than that by rail ? 

Mr. Miller. I can not tell you. We have no way of knowing what 
the cost would be by rail from our island because, unless we figured 
the cost around through Sandusky, around through the Toledo gate- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 47 

Snnrln t d g0t m ? etroit tkat w »y, of course the cost of getting to 
Sanduskv would be practically the same as getting to Detroit by 

b? Detroit' l"’ 1 kno ' v , what th< ; freight rates would be from Sandusky 
to Detroit, because it is an absolutely unfeasible proposition for us 

°i^ a n^^^Sr rt0f th0sevessel 

Mr. Miller. I do not know anything about that. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know whether those vessels operate under 
American registry or Canadian. 

Mr. Miller. Mr. Dustin, of the Ashley & Dustin lines, is here and 
can answer that question. 

Mr. DrsTDf. We are under American registry and did not make 
any enort to go to Canadian. A Canadian boat can not operate in 
American waters. That is what we call coastwise trade. If we had 
our boat under Canadian registry we could not go to Kelleys Island 
Catawba Island, North and Middle Bass, and Put in Bay, because 5 
we would be a coasting American vessel. We can land at an Ameri¬ 
ca 11 port; we can go to Muskegon and load and bring it into a 
C anadian port, such as Amherstburg, but we could not stop and 
take on and discharge cargo for American ports between Muskegon 
and Amherstburg. 

Mr. Briggs. You would fall under the coastwise trade? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know whether either of those vessels that were 
taken off, that their boilers had been condemned by the United States 
inspection service? 

Mr. Miller. I think one of the boats mentioned here in this peti¬ 
tion was the Tourist. That was a small steamer that was built espe¬ 
cially, I think, for ice-breaking purposes. They used it to break ice 
in the spring and fall to give us very early service. There is an¬ 
other gentleman here who will take up that matter. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that the Kirby t 

Mr. Miller. No; that was the Tourist . That boat had to cease 
operations and was sold because they could not carry enough pas¬ 
sengers during the season she was built for to pay the cost of opera¬ 
tion. And the Kirby , I think, during the season of 1919—of course, 
we have no idea whether the boilers were good or not; the farmers are 
not capable of going into those things, but we have heard some talk 
about renewing the boilers of the Kirby. I do not think I am com¬ 
petent to answer you whether the boilers are all right or not. But 
she must have passed inspection because she ran in the season of 
1919. I do not think there was any effort to bring her out in the 
season of 1920, so I do not think the boilers had anything to do with 
it, but I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to get at are the facts. 

Mr. Miller. Mr. Dustin can answer that question. 

Mr. Hardy. If this is just a drive by the owners of the boats to 
repeal the seaman’s law, that is one thing; but if it is public necessity 
by which people are deprived of facilities, because of requirements 
under the seaman’s law, that is another thing. So that I ask you, 
with reference to your island, there is only water transportation 
available? 


48 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And yet with the requirements there for three boats, 
they have taken off two of them. Now it seems to me that boat 
transportation is cheaper, even under the seaman’s law, than rail 
transportation possibly can be, and if they took it off it must have 
been for some other reason and not because of the burden of one or 
two or three—I believe you or Capt. Crosby said on one boat he had 
to increase from 13 to IT men. If the addition of those men makes 
it so you could not name a rate that they could operate and you 
prosper under, then we have to go to something else; but if you can 
still ship your freight cheaper than to Detroit by rail, why the 
remedy would seem to be, as it seems to be otherwise desirable, for 
them to raise the rates. 

Mr. Miller. I might answer you this Avay on that freight raising 
question, that a freight rate of 42 cents a bushel costs me—this is 
my own observation—from the time the peaches are ready to pick 
on the tree, one dollar to get that bushel of peaches on the dock at 
Detroit. Now that does not contemplate any cost prior to the time 
the peach is ripe. It does not contemplate the value of the land or 
the depreciation of the land or the upkeep of the land or tilling or 
spraying the trees, or trimming the trees—which is a big item. 

Mr. Maclean. If the committee will permit me, Mr. M. S. Johann- 
sen, president of the Put in Bay Board of Trade, is here and is in a 
hurry to catch a train. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. The first intimation you had from the compan}^ 
of its inability to continue the service was about a year ago; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Miller. At the start of the season of 1920. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Now this convention that was held in Detroit 
to which this petition refers—when was that held ? 

Mr. Miller. April 8 and 9, 1921. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. About what length of time intervened between 
the meeting in Detroit and the discontinuing of the service? 

Mr. Miller. One year, or one boat season. We were without use 
of the boat in the season of 1920. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And then the following winter that meeting was 
held. 

Mr. Miller. This last spring, this last April. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know to what extent the operating costs 
were increased by other reasons—other causes than the seaman’s act ? 

Mr. Miller. I know nothing at all about operation. 

Mr. Briggs. That is, the increased cost of fuel or anything else 
of that character. 

Mr. Miller. I know from general observation that costs did in¬ 
crease. Of course we were willing as farmers to stand our propor¬ 
tionate share in freight rates, which have to keep up with the cost of 
operation; but we can not stand freight rates that make it unprofit¬ 
able to produce our fruits. 

Mr. Hardy. As I understand, you do not know what per cent of 
the total cost of transportation would be involved in these four addi¬ 
tional men, from 13 to 17, on board of the vessel Capt. Crosby 
spoke of? 

Mr. Miller. Oh, I know nothing about that. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 49 

STATEMENT OF ME. S. M. JOHANNSEN, PUT IN BAY, OHIO, 
PRESIDENT OF THE PUT IN BAY BOARD OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. Johannsen. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, 
I want to emphasize what Mr. Miller just said of the fruit-growing 
industry at the islands. That part he has not stated any too strong. 
I would add to that simply that fruit must go to the market at a 
certain time, when it is ripe; otherwise it will deteriorate and rot. 
1 on may say “ They can raise something else.” These farmers can 
not raise something else, because the limit of their acreage is from 
10 to 15 acres, and it is only in that way they can be made productive 
so that the family can make a living off of it by fruit growing- 
grapes and peaches, not potatoes nor wheat, even if the soil were 
fitted for it. 

Now, I do not want to repeat what Mr. Miller has said; I do not 
want to take up your time, but these islands—I am talking about 
the same islands Mr. Miller was talking about—are located about in 
the middle of Lake Erie, 60 miles from Detroit, the same distance 
from Cleveland, about 45 to 48 miles from Toledo, and 22 miles from 
Sandusky. The people who live there—I am talking about Put in 
Bay Island in particular, where I am living, which is the larger of 
these islands—there are about 500 people living there now. The 
population has decreased in the last five years about 100. The prin¬ 
cipal way of getting a living there, aside from fruit growing, is a 
summer resort. Put in Bay perhaps has no equal anywhere as a 
natural resort. There are about 1,800 acres there, and the part of 
the island devoted to a summer resort is all along the shore, where 
there are summer cottages and hotels. The people from Toledo, 
Cleveland, Columbus, and Detroit have summer homes there. It is 
not a summer resort such as you may think of, in a general way, 
simply run by a corporation during the summer time and then 
abandoned in the fall, to take up operation again the next summer, 
as you find a good many resorts along the Lakes and elsewhere; but 
this resort has been built up and is being maintained by the home 
people of the island, the people who live there the year around, and 
who are entirely dependent upon it. 

We have a municipal corporation there and, as every municipal 
corporation has, we have a large indebtedness. In fact, our indebted¬ 
ness is to the limit, the bond indebtedness, for furnishing pure 
water, sufficient sewage facilities, public parks, and so forth. And 
we have schools there and we try to maintain and are maintaining 
them, and perhaps the cost of maintaining these schools is larger 
than in any other part of the United States, because we try to main¬ 
tain and are maintaining a first-grade high school. 

Mr. Hardy. You say you have a population of 500? 

Mr. Johannsen. 500; yes, sir—482. We therefore have to em¬ 
ploy, although we only have 65 pupils in our schools, four teachers; 
two teachers of the high school, in order to maintain it as a first- 
grade high school. And the cost per pupil from the primary grades, 
including the seniors in the high school, is $125. 

In addition to a summer resort which is operating there, the 
United States Government maintains a fish hatchery for the propa¬ 
gation of white fish mainly, as does also the Ohio State hatchery, 

48420—21-4 


50 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

where Ohio State is maintaining a hatchery there. They propagate 
and plant as many as 500 million little white fish there every spring, 
besides hatching out pickerel and herring. Some years ago, to 
perpetuate the memory of Commodore Perry who redeemed the great 
Northwest at the battle of Lake Erie in 1813, the United States 
Government and the States along the Great Lakes, in 1913, made 
an appropriation to build a memorial there at a cost of $1,000,000-— 
one of the finest in the world. This memorial, of course, was built 
primarily in memory of Commodore Perry and his men, as well as 
to commemorate 100 years of peace between the two English-speak¬ 
ing nations. Great Britain and this country, and to stimulate pa¬ 
triotism and good citizenship. 

Mr. Rosenbeoom. That was before the passage of this act? 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir. It was completed in 1915. What I was 
going to say simply is this—the intention was and this memorial has 
been visited and is being visited every year by over 200,000 people— 
it is self maintaining. They charge 25 cents to go to the top. It is 
a Doric column, 325 feet high. It is self maintaining and the Gov¬ 
ernment is not put to any additional expense. The commission 
that constructed this memorial was composed of such men as Gen. 
Nelson A. Miles, Gen. Keefer, John H. Clark—at present on the 
Supreme Court of the United States—Col. Henry Watterson, etc. 

Then we come down to the operation of the boats. At the begin¬ 
ning of the La Follette Act there were eight boats operating at Put 
in Bay, between the cities of Toledo, Cleveland, Detroit, and San¬ 
dusky. 

Mr. Briggs. About what size boats were those? 

Mr. Johannsen. All the way from 100 passenger to 3,000. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the tonnage ? 

Mr. Johannsen. The tonnage, I do not know. It is passengers 
lam talking about. 

Mr. Briggs. That is all right. 

Mr. Johannsen. Most of them operated, of course, during the 
height of the season. Of those eight boats, four have been withdrawn 
at the present time. The first one to be withdrawn was the steamer 

Lakeside. 

Mr. Briggs. When was that? 

Mr. Johannsen. Three years ago. She was a boat that was spe¬ 
cially built for ice breaking, quite a large boat, stern wheeler, carry¬ 
ing 800 to 900 people. She operated to supply the resort in the 
summer, and particularly the population during the late fall and 
early spring, giving service up until after the holidays, up to the 1st 
of January, and coming out again anywhere between the middle of 
February and the 1st of March. She was a fine steel steamer, very 
comfortable. She was sold because they could not make expenses. 

Next came a little steamer, the Tourist , that Mr. Miller mentioned,, 
that could carry 100 people. She was a smaller vessel, I think 75 
feet long, built of steel, and could break some ice. Under the La 
Follette Act she was only allowed to carry 12 passengers during the 
soring and fall—during the time in the service when she was needed. 
During the summer she would run small excursions, and so forth; 
but during the spring and fall she would only run to the islands up 
there, and could only carry 12 passengers, and carried a crew of four, 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 51 

manned under the La Follette Act. She was sold down at Erie, Pa., 
and converted into a fishing tug. 

The next best thing to take the place is a little bit of a gasoline 
boat that is operating now. 

Mr. Scott. That is the one you went out and got ? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes. I think it is about 55 feet long. I do not 
know what horsepower gas engine it has. Anyway, this boat, as 
soon as the ice permits in the spring and as late as it is permitted by 
the ice in the fall to navigate, runs to accommodate the island people. 
It is not that they want to travel on a boat of that kind, but because 
of necessity. I came over in that boat this year in March, when it. 
was loaded to the water’s edge with freight—hay and everything 
imaginable—and in the center of it were piled 48 people. This boat 
does not come under the La Follette Act at all. It can do anything 
it wants to. Those people were homeward bound, and you know 
what people will do when they are homeward bound—they will take 
anything; so that those people took anjdhing they could get hold of, 
and they were bound for home. Quite a sea was rolling, and most 
of them were seasick, and nearly all of them said the}^ wished they 
had stayed ashore. There were onty two men operating this boat, 
and there would be onty one operating it if it was not for handling 
the freight. There is no lifeboat or life raft, and they would not 
have the little boat behind only in case of fire. They can pile this 
boat as full as they want to, as far as the law is concerned; as many 
people as want to can get on. There is not anything to interfere. 
But, gentlemen, some day something will happen that will wake up 
the people who are responsible for such laws or neglect of laws. 

Mr. Free. You want this act to apply to that boat, then, do you? 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir, we want boats that we can travel on com¬ 
fortably. This boat supplies the service; and then we have another 
boat, the steamer Arrow. 

Mr. Hardy. Before you leave that boat that carries 12 passengers, 
they were required to have certain equipment ? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And without this equipment the passenger capacity 
was reduced, but with that equipment it was not reduced, under the 
seaman’s act? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes; it was reduced. In the summer time, for 
excursions, 112,1 think, is the number. 

Mr. Hardy. And in the wintertime they had fewer passengers un¬ 
less they have the boat equipped to meet contingencies; and they did 
not have the boat equipped, and so they had to reduce the passengers. 
Is not that correct ? 

Mr. Johannsen. I can not answer that. I can say we have an¬ 
other boat there, the steamer Arrow, that runs on the same route, 
coming out about the first week in April, and which runs until the 
last week in November. 

Mr. Hardy. My impression is, and I think I am right, and perhaps 
you understand it that way, too, that on those winter routes where 
the ice and the other dangers infest the sea, in order to carry pas¬ 
sengers, passenger boats were required to carry certain equipment 
proportioned to the number of passengers they carry, and if they 
did not have the equipment they could not carry the passengers. 


52 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Johannsen. I do not think so. It did not apply. I will give 
the illustration of the steamer Arrow - 

Mr. Hardy. This boat you mention here, which could only carry 
12 passengers in the winter, in the summer could carry 112? 

Mr. Johannsen. For the same reason the steamer Arrow in the 
winter is only allowed 80 passengers; in the spring and fall, up to 
the 15th day of May, from the 15th of December, she is only allowed 
80 passengers, whereas between the 15th of May and the 15th of 
December she is allowed 800. 

Mr. Hardy. Isn’t she limited owing to the possibility of taking 
care of them: is not that the purpose? 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not know about that. 

Mr. Hardy. That was the purpose of the bill. 

Mr. Scott. Prior to the passage of the La Follette Act, when you 
were operating, you say you had eight ships operating there for a 
great many years. That country was built up under those condi¬ 
tions, was it not ? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. How many lives did you ever lose in that operation, 
prior to this law that was put on the statute books to protect lives. 

Mr. Johannsen. I have lived there for 32 years, and in that time 
on all the boats of the Cleveland & Sandusky Line not one life was 
lost, and we had very good service and very nice boats, thanks to 
the enterprise of the steamboat people. 

The next boat we lost was the steamer Kirby , as Mr. Miller has 
explained. 

Another boat we lost was the steamer City of New York , running 
between Cleveland and Put in Bay, a passenger boat. Her route has 
partially been supplied by the C. & B. Line in connection with the 
run to Cedar Point. It‘is not of much service to us, but better than 
none. And what we are dreading is simply the fact we have this 
steamer City of Erie , and if something should happen to the sister 
boats on the line between Cleveland and Buffalo, and she was taken 
off, we would be without a boat there. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That has not happened yet ? 

Mr. Johannsen. No ; it has not happened yet, but those things hap¬ 
pen. When this Nation started to be a republic the others all fol¬ 
lowed. 

Mr. Free. They either followed or went ahead of us. 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. And there have been no new boats built 
since the seamen’s act went into effect. The question comes up some¬ 
times, some of our people say thoughtlessly, let us build our own 
boats, independent of these passenger steamboat people. You know 
the answer to that is very clear. In the first place, it takes money 
to build these boats, and unless there is the prospect of prosperous 
business ahead, you must pay full in cash. You can not borrow on 
those things from the shipbuilders; they won’t take 50 per cent in 
bonds or mortgages. And then if these steamboat men can not op¬ 
erate successfully, who have spent a lifetime in developing these 
lines, we could not do it under the same conditions. 

Mr. Briggs. Has not the passenger business fallen off there at all 
during recent years in the operation of those vessels. 

Mr. Johannsen. No ; I do not know that it has fallen off. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 53 


Mr. Briggs. Do you mean to say the boats have been carrying 
just as many passengers and just as much freight as usual, and yet 
the boat owners have taken the boats off the line when they have ex¬ 
clusive privileges between those points? 

Mr. Johannsen. I can not say that it has; I do not know. But 
1 know if we had kept those other boats, we would have had a great 
many more passengers there. 

Mr. Briggs. You are talking about the successful operation of 
those ships and trying to find out what the causes are for any de¬ 
cline with the ships, and I am trying to find out what the causes 
may be. 

Mr. Johannsen. I am only familiar with this one boat, the Arrow , 
which carries 80 passengers in the spring and 800 in the summer. 
I know at one time she was operated with one engineer and fireman, 
because she only operated for six hours a day. 

Mr. Briggs. I am referring now to the business that was carried 
by these vessels, the amount of traffic they had, passenger and freight. 
Is it not a fact that during the war a good deal of this traffic fell off ? 

Mr. Johanssen. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It did not. 

Mr. Johannsen. With us it was different. It seemed that every¬ 
body at Detroit and Cleveland earned such high wages they could 
afford to come. 

Mr. Briggs. When did this trouble come. When did this trouble, 
because of which the ship owners said they could not operate, come? 

Mr. Johannsen. About three years ago. 

Mr. Briggs. That was shortly after the armistice or just before 
that time? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It started in just after the close of the war and has 
continued since? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. What causes were assigned; simply the fact the ex¬ 
cess requirement of men on those ships was the cause of that, or have 
there been other causes as well ? I mean the additional cost of coal, 
equipment, and supplies generally, the mounting costs that attached 
to all industries, boats and everything else? 

Mr. Johannsen. I think that has been partly the cause, but I 
know this much, that the steamer Arrow , they can only carry 80 
passengers in the spring and fall. Now, if their season could be 
extended beyond the 15th of September to the 15th of October, Avhen 
they have fine weather up in Lake Erie, and they could keep on 
carrying excursions to the limit of 800 people, and then resume be- 
fore the 15th of May, say from the middle of April on- 

Mr. Hardy. Let me say to you here, this bill that is now intro¬ 
duced is similar to a bill introduced at the last session, and there 
was an agreed report which passed the House, extending your sum¬ 
mer season as you suggest. All of us seemed to be ready to agree 
on that. That would obviate that part of the difficulty. But this 
other matter, of taking your two watches away, up to 16 hours, is 

another proposition. . _ 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not know anything about that, but this 
much* I do know that if the season would be extended we would have 
much better prospects of the boats remaining there. 


54 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN \s ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you any assurance of that from the ship 
operators ? 

Mr. Johannsen. It is only natural. We can say that because the 
profits from the whole season will warrant them operating a whole 
season. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the fare from Put in Bay to Detroit, a dis¬ 
tance of 60 miles, I believe you said? 

Mr. Johannsen. The passenger fare? 

Mr. Hardy. Yes. 

Mr. Dustin. Ninety cents, including war tax. 

Mr. Hardy. Ninety cents for sixty miles? 

Mr. Dustin. Eighty cents net. 

Mr. Hardy. That is about a cent and a half a mile or a little less. 
Can you travel anywhere else in the world on railroads as cheap 
as that? 

Mr. Johannsen. Maybe not; no. 

Mr. Hardy. If they raised that one-half, paid half as much again 
and made it somewhere approximate the railroad charges, would not 
those four men Capt. Crosby spoke of be taken care of by that 
increased rate? 

Mr. Scott. They would be if you allowed them to carry 800 pas¬ 
sengers; but if you multiply 80 by 12 cents it does not make much 
of a return. 

Mr. Hardy. We are talking about increasing the rate on the entire 
business and, in addition to that, you have more passengers if you 
have more facilities. 

Mr. Gahn. Would not that addition just serve to drive them off 
the water and they would go to the resort along the shore? 

Mr. Johannsen. I was just going to answer that question. They 
have keen competition. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Johannsen, as I understand it, the provisions in 
the seaman’s act in regard to life-saving equipment and having so 
many watches on board were designed for the protection of human 
life. Now do I understand that you and the other representatives 
of the patrons of this service here are not concerned in the retention 
of those provisions either in whole or in part? 

Mr. Johannsen. Well, of course, that gets into the operation of 
steamboats. I do not know much about that. Only the causes 
should be remedied, so that we would have a continued operation and 
good passenger service during the summer and, for our home sup¬ 
plies, as late and early in the spring as we can. 

Mr. Davis. In other words, you patrons of the service of course 
are the ones primarily interested in the safety of the service. 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DxWis. Now do I understand that you regard the danger from 
the lack of adequate safety to be so remote that you are willing for 
that safety to be discontinued in order to get an increased commercial 
service ? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir; as I said, for 82 years I have lived there 
and never a life has been lost. And compared with the service we 
have to put up with now- 

Mr. Briggs. You do not mean to say that no lives have been lost on 
the Great Lakes. You mean in that one service? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 55 


Mr. Johannsen. Between Cleveland, Toledo and Detroit. I under¬ 
stand on the Great Lakes there have not been any lives lost except 
by suicide. 

Mr. Briggs. Don’t you understand on the Great Lakes there have 
been wrecks and loss of life in recent years? 

Mr. Johannsen. On passenger boats? 

Mr. Briggs. I do not know whether they were passenger boats but 
there have been losses of lives on boats. 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir; except the Eastland at Chicago. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know of any other vessels; you do not 
mean to say none have ever foundered on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Johannsen. Not in the 32 years I know of. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not mean to say there are none; you mean to 
say you know of none, but there may have been such cases ? 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not know of any on Lake Erie. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Is it not a fact the demand for service on Lake 
Erie has decreased in the last couple of years? 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not know. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And that the boats are being discontinued as 
much from lack of business as from the hardships of this act? 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir; in the first place, they can not increase 
their force in view of the competition they have, and all along the 
river and along the shores of Lake Erie, with these small summer 
resorts springing up they could not increase their force and compete. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. The springing up of resorts affects the demand 
for service to Put in Bay. In other words, Put in Bay is going back 
simply of its own accord, and not due to the service? 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Then how do you account for the loss in popu¬ 
lation of 100 in Put in Bay in the last year or so? 

Mr. Johannsen. For this reason that the families that live there 
have to put up with this kind of service since the Lakeside was dis¬ 
continued on the route. They do not want to live there in the winter 
time. It is not pleasant. It is simply because they are attached 
to the island that they live there, but in case of hospital wants, etc., 
or severe sickness, they ought to have a good doctor there, and all 
that; and it is not a pleasant prospect for a man with a family to be 
tied up there under those conditions, and that is the reason they 
have gone away. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. They have moved in the last year? 

Mr. Johannsen. They have moved away in the last three or four 


year. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. In the last three or four years ? 

Mr. Johannsen. Those are the facts, and if it continues like that— 
for instance, a year ago we had an epidemic of flu and different 
things, and I do not think any of you gentlemen here would think 
of living on an island like that without having proper facilities of 
getting away. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you be willing to let the law take hands oft 
and say you would just leave it to the owners as to what kind of 
safety devices they would have, and they might have nothing? 

Mr. Johannsen. We are living there, and you might stretch a 
point and say to trust it to the boat owners, because they would pro- 


56 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

tect their passengers and their property, which they must protect, 
and leave it up to them. That may not be a good thing for the lakes. 

Mr. Briggs. I think Mr. Johannsen is as much concerned about 
the safety to life and limb as anybody else, as indicated by his ref¬ 
erence a while ago, when he referred to a boat that was allowed to 
take as many passengers as they wanted to without any protection 
for life in emergency or anything of that kind. 

Mr. Hardy. So, as I understand, you think the law ought to make 
some requirements? 

Mr. Johannsen. Oh, no doubt. 

Mr. Hardy. Do jmu think two watches too many for a boat on 
a 15-hour trip ? 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not presume they ought to work more than 
4 ei^ht hours apiece, although I work a good deal longer than that. 

Mr. Hardy. Two watches for 12 hours? 

Mr. Johannsen. Two watches for 12 hours. I presume, for a 
fireman, 12 hours is too long, although I do not know anything about 
operating boats. 

Mr. Gahn. You do not have any runs that long? 

Mr. Johannsen. No, sir; none of our boats. 

Mr. Briggs. Is there a round-trip rate between Put in Bay and 
Detroit as well as a one-way rate, or is it a one-way fare? 

Mr. Johannsen. No; it is a round-trip fare. Mr. Dustin can ex¬ 
plain that. 

Mr. Dustin. Maybe you do not understand the nature of our 
business. It is volume of business we figure on, for a one day’s 
outing. If we get our rate too high we are not going to get the 
business, because at Electric Park we have a beautiful city park, 
where they can go for 15 cents for the round trip. And we are com¬ 
peting and giving an attraction to those people, and giving them a 
cheap rate for a day’s outing. It is volume of business we figure 
on. The local business in the spring of the year, that we used 
to give, Mr. Johannsen, and so forth, with the freight, we figured we 
were breaking even and, maybe along toward the middle of May we 
would commence to make a little money. But the fare—it seems 
cheap, and it is. Detroit is noted for being the cheapest place in the 
world for a boat ride, and it has been this business upon which these 
beautiful boats have been built in Detroit to carry these people. If 
we get the rate too high, the business is going to go away from us. 

Mr. Briggs. Is the rate you named a little while ago, of 90 cents, 
a round-trip or a one-way rate? 

Mr. Dustin. That is a one-way rate—for a man coming one way— 
but we have excursion days wdien we have excursion rates. 

Mr. Briggs. How often do you have those during the summer 
time? 

Mr. Dustin. We start out in June and the business is over by 
Labor Day. 

Mr. Briggs. For every one of those days do you have round-trip 
rates ? 

Mr. Dustin. We get more for carrying them on Sundays than we 
do on week days. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the round-trip rate? 

Mr. Dustin. $1.25 on Sundays and, on week days, 90 cents. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 57 

Mr. Briggs. That is just a one-way rate, then? 

Mr. Dustin. That is either way. We quote a rate of 90 cents, and 
they are allowed to carry a lunch basket and return. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, 90 cents will take them one way or it 
will take them for the round trip ? 

Mr. Dustin. It will take them one way that day or the round trip 
that day. 

Mr. Briggs. Either one or the other ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes; it is a cheap rate on which the business is built. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. He can stay right on the boat if he wants to and 
come right back ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Johannsen. I do not know that I have anything else to say 
only to appeal to you to help us save our homes there and to live in 
comfort. This resort has been built up by the boat service and the 
work of two generations. 

Mr. Briggs Of course what you are after is service? 

Mr. Johannsen. Yes, sir. We carry all of our eggs in one basket, 
as they say, and we would like to live there. And I might say that 
we have not any rich people and have not any poor people there, 
either. Never in the history of our islands has anyone ever gone to 
the poorhouse or to the penitentiary. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Scott. But if this keeps up, you will have to go to the poor- 
house ? 

Mr. Johannsen. What I mean to say is it is an ideal American 
community—I wish there were more such—and there is not the con¬ 
gestion there is in the cities. And I know it is not the intention of 
you Congressmen, and not the intention of anyone, to drive away 
such a service. 

(The committee thereupon took a recess until 2 o’clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. 

The committee reassembled at 2 o’clock p. m., pursuant to the tak¬ 
ing of recess. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, we 
will now hear from Mr. Clifford Gildersleeve, representing the 
Cleveland Chamber of Commerce of Cleveland, Ohio. 

STATEMENT OF MR. CLIFFORD GILDERSLEEVE, INDUSTRIAL 

COMMISSIONER, THE CLEVELAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 

CLEVELAND, OHIO. 

Mr. Gildersleeve. The Cleveland Chamber of Commerce has gone 
on record repeatedly as favoring the relaxation of certain provisions 
of the seamen’s act, as affecting the Great Lakes. 

Most recently the board of directors has urged that the act be so 
amended as to extend the season during which boats may be profit¬ 
ably operated, from May 15 to September 15, as now fixed, to from 
May 1 to October 15, as the amended bill provides. 

Previously the Chamber of Commerce of Cleveland has recorded 
itself as believing that “no substantial need of the seamen’s act is 
now shown with respect to the Great Lakes.” 


58 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

The chamber of commerce appreciates the desirability of safety 
in any place. In view of the fact, however, that in a five-year period 
preceding the passage of the La Follette Seaman’s Act 82,415,716 
persons were carried by steamboats on the Great Lakes, with a loss 
of only 30 lives from all causes, which includes a fair percentage of 
suicides, the chamber of commerce does not believe, in view of that 
fact, that the life boat and life raft provisions of the seaman’s act, 
as it now reads, are applicable to or should be enforced upon traffic 
on the Great Lakes. 

In the seaman’s act no adequate allowance has been made for the 
difference in conditions upon the ocean and upon the lakes. Upon 
the Great Lakes where vessels are constantly touching at ports and 
are out of sight of land but a few hours at a time, the restrictions 
of the law are unnecessarily stringent and add a burden that is unfair 
to lake commerce. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Cleveland is of the opinion that 
the seaman’s act should be even further amended to differentiate 
properly between foreign trade and coastwise trade upon the Great 
Lakes. 

That is all I have to say. 

This bill was received by us between directors’ meetings, and has 
not had specific action. The directors have previously taken action 
on the provisions of the bill, as I have indicated. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean no action has been taken on this special 
bill introduced? 

Mr. Gildersleeve. On this precise bill; no, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Your reference is to the bill, as introduced at the last 
session of Congress? 

Mr. Gildersleeve. One bill at the last session of Congress pro¬ 
vided for the inspection of boats. We have recorded ourselves as 
being favorable to that. 

Mr. Briggs. That is the one you refer to ? 

Mr. Gildersleeve. As one of the things we have done. Over a 
period of years since 1913 the Chamber of Commerce of Cleveland 
has been interested in this subject and has recorded itself with your 
committee and with the Committee on Commerce of the Senate as 
being for or against certain provisions, as I have indicated in that 
statement. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, we have one or two more witnesses 
in regard to the agricultural interests that are affected by the fact 
that we are short of ships. We would like you to hear now from 
Mr. Frank W. Fletcher, representing the Alpena Chamber of Cor- 
merce. 

Mr. Hardy. Before Mr. Fletcher testifies I would like to ask this 
gentleman if he thinks a vessel running 15 hours ought not to have 
two watches? 

Mr. Gildersleeve. You understand that anything that I say in 
answer to that kind of a question is an expression of personal opinion. 

Mr. Hardy. That is all. 

Mr. Gildersleeve. I do think that a ship operating a 15-hour run 
should have two watches. 

Mr. Hardy. You know this bill provides for the amendment of 
section 2 so that it will read that “ where the continuous run is 16 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 59 

hours or more they are required to have two watches,” but it does 
not seem to make any provision for two watches. I have not myself 
studied the bill through, but, in your judgment, there ought to be 
two watches if the run is much shorter than 16 hours? 

Mr. Gildersleeve. Yes. 

STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK W. FLETCHER, REPRESENTING THE 

ALPENA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND GENERAL SHIPPING 

INTERESTS OF ALPENA COUNTY, ALPENA, MICH. 

Mr. Maclean. What is the population of your county ? 

Mr. Fletcher. Alpena County has about 20,000 people, of whom 
13,000 live in Alpena. The rest are farmers. Until about 1900 we 
were a lumbering’ community. Since then we have become an agri¬ 
cultural community, with manufacturing in the city. We also are 
the biggest commercial shipping point on Lake Huron. We ship a 
thousand tons of fresh fish out of there every year. Those fresh fish 
have to be brought into market quickly, and by rail we can not do it. 
A boat goes out at, say, 3 o’clock in the morning and returns at 3 
or 4 o’clock in the afternoon, and up until 6 in the fall. The express 
companies require a billing before 3 o’clock in the afternoon, and if 
those are not billed then they have got to lay over that night. With 
the boat we can make 4 to 6 trips a week, and especially with the 
Saturday night boat—it would leave at midnight—and those fish 
would be in Chicago the next morning, or by Monday morning they 
are in the Ohio port. . 

In regard to our agricultural interests, we are becoming a fruit¬ 
raising community, and are raising what are called roots, all kinds 
of underearth products, such as potatoes, etc. Last year, without 
boats, we lost thousands of bushels of potatoes by putting them into 
cars and with no guarantee to the shipper. The shipper had to 
prepare his own car and take his own chances. Those were put in 
and destroyed. Up until 1885 we had only boat service. Since 1885 
we have had some railroad service, but a great deal of our material 
can be handled better under all conditions by water. We ask it 
both for the development of our business community, our farming 
community, and our personal travel. 

It is also eliminating a very large percentage of our tourist crowd. 
The whole of northern Michigan is backed by small lakes which 
to-day are utilized more and more for tourist work, and the cutting 
off of these boats has taken that off, and we are left for the first time 
in five years without water transportation. 

Mr. Davis. When did that transportation cease ? 

Mr. Fletcher. That transportation ceased on the 15th of last Sep¬ 
tember. 

Mr. Davis. And has not been resumed this spring? 

Mr. Fletcher. And has not been resumed this spring. 

Mr. Davis. What is the customary time when it would be resumed 
under normal conditions? 

Mr. Fletcher. Prior to the seaman law the customary time was at 
the opening of navigation, or the breaking of the ice. I have gone 
five miles out on Thunder Bay to meet the first boat, gone out on 
the ice and met her part way out to get my supplies in. But the 


60 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

opening of navigation would be during the month of April some¬ 
time and sometimes in March. The passenger boats of later years 
would begin running, before the seaman act, about April 15 and 
operate up until Thanksgiving time. 

Mr. Davis. When was the lake navigable prior to the seaman’s 
act? 

Mr. Fletcher. The lake was navigable prior to the seaman’s act 
by act of God sometimes as early as the 1st of March, or whenever 
the ice was out of the river, the Sault River, St. Mackinaw, and 
the --River, Detroit. 

Mr. Davis. Well, has navigation begun that soon at any period 
since the seaman’s act went into effect ? 

Mr. Fletcher. The water has been open. 

Mr. Davis. Well, have the ships operated at any time? 

Mr. Fletcher. Large freighters start generally on the question of 
insurance. The boats we are talking about, the small boats- 

Mr. Davis. That is what I am talking about. 

Mr. Fletcher. The passenger boats are restricted under this act 
in their carrying capacity of passengers. The small freighter will 
operate at any time it goes out, if it can operate at all under the law. 
Last year the passenger boats on Lake Huron started on the 15th of 
June, and ceased on the 15th of September—the boats serving our 
community. 

Mr. Davis. During what period did they operate in 1919? 

Mr. Fletcher. In 1919 I think they operated from May 19 to 
October 1. 

Mr. Davis. When does your summer resort season ordinarily 
open? When would the summer resort people come anyway if they 
were permitted to, so far as transportation is concerned ? 

Mr. Fletcher. The summer resort people are reached by the 90- 
day limit in summer, but the people who have to live in there and 
do business in there and ship their products out of there want this 
boat service as long as navigation will allow it. 

Under the existing law the boats could only run when they had 
the excess summer traffic which allowed the maximum amount of 
passengers to be carried. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Great Lakes is the danger the only obstacle 
in the way of opening navigation in the spring? 

Mr. Fletcher. Yes. 

Mr. Gahn. Are there any storms of any consequence ? 

Mr. Fletcher. You are very apt to have better weather in March 
sometimes than you are in June. I have seen beautiful Decembers 
and extremely bad Septembers. 

Mr. Gahn. How about October? 

Mr. Fletcher. October is generally our Indian summer month, 
one of the nicest months we have. 

Mr. Davis. From your understading of the situation, would Mr. 
Scott’s bill that we favorably reported at the last session and passed 
through the House meet the situation? 

Mr. Fletcher. I am not familiar with the bill reported last year. 
I am familiar with this one. 

And I want to answer that gentleman’s question before I am 
through. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 61 


Mr. Davis. I beg your pardon. I though you were through. 

Mr. Gahn. I am through. I think he is referring to Judge Hardy. 

Mr. Fletcher. Judge Hardy, in regard to that 16-hour business, 
you want to read four or five lines more, and you will find that 
there is a two-watch system provided in the bill for an 8-hour run. 

Mr. Hardy. I just told this gentleman that I had read down lower, 
and there seemed to be two conflicting provisions. 

I would like to know the difference between the first provision 
there and the second proviso. 

Mr. Fletcher. The first provision provides for three watches in 
the engine room, and the second proviso provides for two watches 
in the engine room. 

Mr. Hardy. Well it looks like the first provision provides for the 
sailors, oilers, and water tenders to be divided into at least two 
watches where the voyage is 16 hours or more. 

Mr. Fletcher. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. And the second provides that the sailors, oilers, water 
tenders, and firemen shall be divided into at least two watches. 

Mr. Fletcher. For an 8-hour run. 

Mr Hardy. For an 8-hour run? 

Mr. Fletcher. Yes, and above a 16-hour run you have three 
watches in the fireroom. 

Mr. Gahn. You are not required to have more than two outside 
of the engine room ? 

Mr. Fletcher. No. 

Mr. Hardy. For an 8-hour run }mu have two watches for the fire¬ 
men, and for a 16-hour run you have three watches for the firemen?. 

Mr. Fletcher. Yes. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, we have one witness from the western 
part of Michigan. I would like you to hear now from Mr. R. W. 
Piepkorn, a commercial fisher of Alpena. I would like to know from 
Mr. Piepkorn what effect the lacks of ships has upon that business. 

STATEMENT OF ME. R. W. PIEPKORN, ALPENA, MICH. 

Mr. Piepkorn. The effect of the lack of ships on our business, as 
Mr. Fletcher has stated, is this: Our boats go out about 5 o’clock in 
the morning and return at from 3 to 6 in the afternoon. We have 
one train in the afternoon which leaves for the south at 5.15. The 
express companies do not take any billings after 3 o’clock, conse¬ 
quently we have to hold our'fish 24 hours in Alpena, whereas if we 
ship by boat we have boats at 6 o’clock, I think, three nights in the 
week, and on 'Saturday night in particular a boat at midnight, which 
takes our fish into Detroit, Toledo, and Cleveland, or Buffalo for 
Monday morning. If we ship them by rail, we hold them there until 
Monday night. Fish, you know, are a perishable stuff, and they are 
not in the condition they would be if shipped by boat, and I think 
that is going to work a hardship on the commercial fishermen and 
everything if they do not get boats this year. 

Mr. Scott. In order that the committee may judge of the impor¬ 
tance of that particular undertaking, I think you might state how 
many fish tugs are operating out of Alpena now. 


62 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Piepkorn. At the present time there are seven steam tugs, 
and numerous gasoline boats, employing about from 70 to 80 men, 
producing a thousand tons of fish a season. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. So far the boat service has been adequate, has 
it not ? I gather from what you said that you anticipate that it will 
get bad. 

Mr. Piepkorn. Well, we know it will. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. So far it has not come yet ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. No ; it has not come yet. We have had boat service 
during the hot months up to this }^ear. In the hot weather we were 
up against it. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. All during these past five years, when the sea¬ 
men’s act was in operation, there has been a plenty of boat service, 
has there not? 

Mr. Piepkorn. No; there has not. We had boat service this last 
year from the middle of June until the middle of September. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And prior to that? 

Mr. Piepkorn. It has been getting shorter every year. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How far back? 

Mr. Piepkorn. From 1915. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you know, of your own knowledge, why that is so ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. It is due to the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that what somebody told you, or do you know of 
your own knowledge? 

Mr. Piepkorn. I know it, because that has added to the burdens 
of the vessel owner; and I do not believe that they can run a vessel 
as profitably- 

Mr. Briggs. I mean, do you know what is causing the unprofitable 
character of their operation, the increased cost of a general character, 
and by that I mean the cost of fuel, the cost of accessories, the cost 
of machinery, the cost of crews, and so on ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. The biggest drawback in the proposed seamen’s act 
is the cutting down of the passenger capacity after the 15th day of 
September. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you think that is the chief cause? 

Mr. Piepkorn. That is the chief cause. We have had people on 
our dock, on the Alpena D. & C. dock, where they would take one 
boat, and there were people with 100 tickets that had to go back to 
the hotel and wait until the next day. 

Mr. Hardy. Was not that difficulty substantially met by the amend¬ 
ment to the act that was agreed to at the last session ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Not long enough. 

Mr. Briggs. What length of time do you contend for? 

Mr. Piepkorn. We should have it from the 15th of April until the 
close of navigation. I think that is during the time the insurance 
goes into effect on boats, prior to the 1st of September. 

Mr. Briggs. Yon mean by that that from the 1st of September to 
the middle of November is when traffic ends on the Lakes? 

Mr. Fletcher. It used to end along about the 1st of December. 

Mr. Brtggs. Did you have a large passenger traffic around the 
month of November of this year? 

Mr. Fletcpier. We have a big passenger traffic up to the frost. 
Our country up there is a good country for the cure of hay fever, 
and they come and stay up there at our inland lakes until the frost^ 


AMENDING SECTIONS t, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 63 


and it is a detriment to business. I myself would not take a chance 
coming down on a boat after September 15, because I would not 
know whether I could get down. 

Mr. Briggs. What are the climatic conditions on the Lakes between 
the middle of September and the end of the season ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. I do not see any difference between them and what 
they are in the summer. We are never out of sight of land. With 
the big deep sea boats crossing Saginaw Bay, they will be out of 
sight of land in half an hour. They are always in the path of 
vessels. I do not believe they are out of sight of a vessel 10 min¬ 
utes any time. Those boats have been operating up) there for 40 
years, and have never lost any life, except by suicide, and you can 
not stop that. 

Mr. Briggs. The reason that these vessels are not allowed to carry 
passengers later than the middle of September is because of a lack 
of prescribed equipment, is not that it? 

Mr. Piepkorn. I do not know. They have got equipment enough 
for the summer. Is not a man’s life worth as much in the summer 
as it is in the fall or the early spring? 

Mr. Briggs. I presume, under the theory of the act, it is much 
more dangerous in certain seasons of the year. For instance, if a 
man gets in the water in the middle of April when the ice is in the 
water, there may be more danger than at some other time. 

Mr. Piepkorn. What do you call proper equipment for a vessel? 

Mr. Briggs. I think the act may designate that. 

Mr. Piepkorn. A lifeboat, a life raft, or- 

Mr. Briggs. I presume that would mean sufficient boats. 

Mr. Piepkorn. I was a marine engineer on the lake at one time, 
and we ran down the schooner Ellen Williams. She had all of her 
sailors, every one of them, but in the excitement they dropped one 
end of her boat, and it was no good. A greenhorn farmer can do 
that, whereas if he had a life raft or a life preserver he would save 
his life. He could not do it with that boat. I would take my 
chances on the life raft. 

Mr. Briggs. A good deal of that is open to dispute, because most 
people think a lifeboat is more advantageous. 

Mr. Piepkorn. I will give you another case. The steamer Cyprus, 
a brand new boat, on her fifth trip came down Lake Superior with 
a load of ore, with 100 per cent capacity. The only man that was 
saved on her came ashore on a life raft. 

Mr. Briggs. How much loss of life resulted from that? 

Mr. Piepkorn. It was around 20 or 25. 

Mr. Briggs. Lost their lives? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. And did not get to shore ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Did not get to shore. 

Mr. Scott. That was a freight boat ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. A freight boat, with 100 per cent life-saving equip¬ 
ment. 

We also had the case of the Colegate in the fall of 1915, that was 
foundered, and the only man saved came ashore on a life raft. 

We had another boat foundered in Lake Superior, and the only 
man that came ashore was the captain, on the pilot house, on a raft. 
I will not take my chances on any boat. 



64 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Furhermore, a boat is built to stand an ordinary storm. The only 
time there is any danger is in foggy weather, but if the rules of the 
road are lived up to she will not get in trouble. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the stormy season on the lakes, if they have 
any ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. I do not know. There is liable to be a storm in 
July, October, or any month. Of course, in July, August and Sep¬ 
tember we look for pretty fair weather. 

Mr. Hardy. One part of the year is a little worse than the other? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Oh, sure. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, which is the worst part of the year? 

Mr. Piepkorn. That I will not say, whether it is the spring or 
fall, but so far we have had two bad storms on these lakes. One in the 
fall of 1915 and one in 1913. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to get at is whether there is a recognized 
season of fair weather, and a recognized season of dangerous weather. 

Mr. Piepkorn. The only time an insurance company makes any 
difference in its rates is after the first day of December. 

Mr. Hardy. Until when? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Then they raise the rate on some hauls up to the 
fifth, and then on another they raise it up to the tenth. After that, 
insurance you can not get. 

Mr. Hardy. Until when? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Until the 10th day of December. 

Mr. Hardy. When does it open up again? 

Mr. Piepkorn. The 15th of April, I believe; I am not sure. 

Mr. Hardy. So the insurance companies fix the dangerous season 
from the first of December until the 15th of April? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Yes. 

Mr. Gahn. They do not discriminate against the month of 
October ? 

Mr. Piepkorn. Not October or November. 

Mr. Hardy. You say there have been quite a number of accidents, 
then, to your knowledge? 

Mr. Piepkorn. With the 100 per cent lifeboat equipment; yes. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as a 
member of the Detroit Board of Commerce, I have been asked by the 
shipping interests of that board to say that they favor the bill as 
introduced by Congressman Scott. We could have had a large 
number of men here representing those interests, but we did not 
believe it was necessary. We have with us a gentleman who repre¬ 
sents the stove interests of the city of Detroit, and I believe that you 
gentlemen know that Detroit leads the world in the manufacture 
of stoves. We will now call on Mr. T. F. Brown, representing the 
stove interests of Detroit. 

Mr. Scott. Before Mr. Brown goes on I would like to ask Mr. 
Fletcher a question. During your testimony I inadvertently was 
called out of the room. In your testimony did you tell the com¬ 
mittee the approximate number of ships that are in sight at all times 
during the season of navigation ? 

Mr. Fletcher. I think not. 

Mr. Scott. I think that would be well, because many of these 
gentlemen are here from the inland. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 65 

Mr. Fletcher. I went on Lake Huron first during the Civil War. 
The only way to get away from the little town of Alpena in those 
days was to go to the nearest lighthouse and stay there until a boat 
passed down the lake. The nearest lighthouse was Thunder Bay 
Island, and when a boat came down the bay you put out in a boat 
and got aboard. I have been there with my family for three days, 
waiting for a boat to pass down Lake Huron during the Civil War. 

I have seen as many as 40 boats in sight of Thunder Bay Island, 
within a comparatively few years, at one time, and there is never a 
time, day or night, when either the boat or its lights can not be seen 
from that point, together with every other point from Fort Huron 
along the route. 

There is one more thing I want to say in answer to the question 
about the cause of trouble to the boats. We have now three good 
reasons why boats are hard to run, because of the cost of coal the 
cost of labor, and the excessive requirements of the La Follette bill. 
The first two things are commercial matters, which we have got to 
meet, can meet and are meeting. The third is unnecessary, when 
we are required to pay extra labor and carry men who do no good. 
That simply puts an extra cost on all freight, and all shippers have 
to meet it. We will meet the questions of labor, fuel, and the neces¬ 
sary expenses, but from unnecessary expenses which Congress has 
put on us under this act we ask some relief. 

Mr. Hardy. My suggestion to you is that I think it would be 
well to direct all your testimony to the showing of what unnecessary 
labor is required by the present law. We all know that you can not 
run at a loss, and are not going to run as business men. 

Mr. Fletcher. I say I think the difference between this present 
bill, as we expressed it, and the act as it stands to-day, is unneces- 
sary. 

Mr. Hardy. That is a general statement, but if you show the re¬ 
quirements here in the present law, we might have a little- 

Mr. Fletcher. We have shown it by the drafting of the present 
bill. 

STATEMENT OF MR. T. F. BROWN, DETROIT, MICH. 

Mr. Brown. Incidentally I represent stove interests of Detroit, the 
Detroit Stove Works, the Michigan Stove and the Art Stove. 
Incidentally, I represent myself to this extent, that I originally 
lived in Nebraska, and moved to Michigan because God had so 
pleased to give us those wonderful rivers, and when I had a little 
money to spend for a little amusement to entertain my family, there 
were a lot of boats going from the city of Detroit that I might use, 
but I now find that there are a lot of those boats that we have not. 
And, from the looks of things, we are going to have less. That is 

my personal view. . „ . . . ., ,, 

Now from the stove works view of it, there has been considerable 
said here about rates. Rates do not enter into it. Whether high, 
low good, bad, or indifferent, we absorb all rates, and on that same 
feature my understanding is that owing to the fact that there is no 
maintenance for rails for such things as that, as there is on rail¬ 
roads, you might say that the elements have given the boat lines a 

48420—21-5 


66 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


natural advantage which should not be taken away from them, and 
their rates boosted up to the same rate as is charged by a railroad, 
and thereby lose the one advantage they have gained on account of 
the fact that they are traveling on the water. They should be en¬ 
titled to that natural advantage there. 

There is another feature in regard to stoves. All the coal and 
wood stoves are moved in the late part of the year, and you know 
that if cold weather comes on and a man has no stove he" wants it, 
and he wants it immediately, and the service of the boat lines is 
about 400 per cent better than it is by rail line to any point, regardless 
of where it is, even to as near a point as Monroe, Mich., or to any 
other place. Any place where there is a boat line going, the service 
is better. 

The stove industry of Detroit was built up because we have a lot 
of boats there and they could give us overnight service to any point, 
except away up the lake around to Chicago. The major portion of 
our business is in Ohio, New York, and^ those States, and that is 
where we have to sell our stoves. We find out that, after getting 
this business all worked up, it looks as though we are going to lose 
that business. The price of our stoves has absorbed all this freight, 
all the rates, regardless of Avhether they are high or low. There is 
only one element which enters into it, and that is service. If we are 
going to sell stoves and compete with other people, we have to make 
stoves as good as they make, or better, and we have to make a price 
that will sell that product, and then we have to deliver it. I might 
cite a case where we shipped a stove this spring to Indiana Harbor, 
and it took a month and two days to get from Detroit, Mich., to In¬ 
diana Harbor, Mich. 

Mr. Hardy. On a boat? 

Mr. Brown. By rail. If it had been on a boat, even if that stove 
had taken a month and two days to be shipped by boat, we would 
have been able to determine that it was not going to get there within 
a reasonable time, and we would not have waited all that time to 
ship the man another stove. If we ship a stove by the D. & C., for 
instance, to-day, and take it down to the dock and deliver it to 
them, we would get a manifest for that stove, and to-night we 
could find out whether that stove was on that boat. If it is, it is 
absolutely certain that it is not going to be lost at sea, and that it 
will arrive at the port of destination the next morning. If it does 
not, we know it is time to ship another stove, so that we can retain 
his good feeling by giving him some service. 

In this instance, where I shipped a stove to Indiana Harbor, I took 
the matter up with the railroad and tried to get information in re¬ 
gard to that stove, but the matter has been dragging along, and con¬ 
sequently we have a customer out there who is decidedly sore at us 
on account of the service we have given him. He can not understand 
why we can not find out about that stove. We do not want to ship 
him another stove because we figure the stove should be in there. 

I have in my desk at the present time some orders for Put in Bay, 
but I can not ship those stoves, because I do not know how to route 
them. I hired myself out to this stove company because I told them 
that I was a traffic man. They have handed me an order for a stove 
to be delivered at Put in Bay, and I have not any more idea than a 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 67 


jaybird as to how I am going to route it, because I have not any as¬ 
surance of a boat line going over there. I have heard that there is 
some little boat that plies to Put in Bay, but I will have to route 
them around the lake and back again. I am like other people, I 
am working for a living, and if a man comes to me and says, “How 
are you going to route this thing to Put in Bay, and I have hired 
myself out as a traffic man, I ought to be able to tell him, and if 
I can not tell him he will think that there is something wrong. 

Whether the seamen’s act is the cause of this, gentlemen, I can not 
tell you, but I can tell you this, that we have not the boats, and, 
from the looks of things, we are going to have a lack of boats. The 
concensus of opinion is that this seamen’s act is the cause of it. 

Mr. Hardy. Right on that question, because I want to find out if 
the seamen’s act is the cause of the condition—the condition is one 
that you have a right to complain of- 

Mr. Brown. That is all I am complaining of, the condition. 

Mr. Hardy. What kind of boats do you ship your stoves on? You 
prefer to ship them by boat. What size boat? 

Mr. Brown. I am not particular as to size, but I understand they 
are side loaders or packet boats, such as the D. & C. have, or the 
White Star Line have. 

Mr. Scott. Passenger and freight boats? 

Mr. Brown. They are really passenger and freight boats, but what 
the marine term for those boats is I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. Capt. Crosby spoke of a boat which he named, and 
gave the tonnage as 609 tons. Before the seamen’s act he said he 
used 13 men on it, and after the seamen’s act he used 17 men on it. 
Now, as I understand you do not care about the freight; you will 
absorb that anyhow ? 

Mr. Brown. We will have to. 

Mr. Hardy. That boat of 609 tons uses four more men? 

Mr. Brown. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. How much additional would that cost you in freight? 
That would be all the seamen’s act would add to it; would it not? 

Mr. Brown. No; that would not be all the seamen’s act would 
add to it—theoretically, yes; but I will try to answer that in a 
minute. But let me answer one more thing. We do not ship stoves 
on the Mackinaw division of the D. & C. any more, because we have 
found out they are not dependable; we do not know whether they 
are going to run or are not going to run. 

Mr. Hardy. That is not because of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Brown. That is what I say. I do not know what the ( cause is. 
Now, let me come back to the other question. I do not know what 
the percentage is. I fear they would increase the freight rate. 

Mr. Hardy. These four more men? 

Mr. Brown. Of course, I am not in a position to say what they 
pay those men, but it would increase it, I imagine, just whatever per 
cent those men were paid. 

Mr. Hardy. That would be less than 25 per cent, would it not, be¬ 
cause I presume they would be the lower paid men, not the captain 
and other officers ? 

Mr. Brown. Let us assume there an increase of 25 per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. Twenty per cent. 

Mr. Brown. Twenty per cent. 



68 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, then, if you pay a rate of so much per 100 
pounds on your stove, you could add. you say, the 20 per cent- 

Mr. Brown. No; we can not add that 20 per cent; we can not add 
a cent to our stove. Our stoves, you understand, are sold in direct 
competition to stoves that may be made at that particular point. I 
do not know that there is any stove industry at Put in Bay, for in¬ 
stance, which is the place we refer to now, but let us transfer this 
argument to Cleveland, we will say. There are stoves made in 
Cleveland, and we have to make the price of our stove compete with 
the stoves in Cleveland, regardless of the freight rate. 

Mr. PIardy. Are not the rates by rail even more than your rates 
by water would be if you added the 20 per cent ? 

Mr. Brown. I will answer that by asking j t ou, are not they en¬ 
titled to be less ? 

Mr. Hardy. I am supposing you are trying to compete with a 
competitor in Cleveland, and you live at Detroit, where you have got 
water transportation ? 

Mr. Brown. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. And I ask you if your transportation is not less, even 
if you add 20 per cent, than the transportation by rail ? 

Mr. Brown. I would imagine it is not. 

Mr. Hardy. You think that 20 per cent added to the water freight 
would be more than equal the rail rate? 

Mr. Brown. I am not absolutely certain, but there would be a 
very little difference in that particular. 

Mr. Hardy. I wish you would figure that out. I think you will 
find you are mistaken. 

Mr. Brown. We picked out Cleveland. I will carry you as far as 
Mackinaw City, Duluth, and these points, but on short hauls like 
Toledo and Cleveland, I do not believe there is a difference of 20 
per cent in the rail rate. 

Mr. Hardy. I am trying to get at what is the trouble with your 
boats. You said just now you could absorb the freight rate and did 
not care what the rates were. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. As far as I have heard, there have been only 
two boats quit. 

Mr. Hardy. I can not keep up with the details. I want to see 
whether these boats are being taken off on account of the burdens 
imposed by the seaman’s act, or what it is. As I understand you, I 
believe you said the freight did not make so much difference—that 
you wanted the transportation, and that you would pay the freight 
and absorb it, and that as to any place that is in competition with 
you by rail rate you have got the advantage, I think, but you are 
uncertain about it even if you added 20 per cent to your present 
rates. Now, just take the boat Capt. Crosby spoke of. If he adds 
all four men, he would add 20 per cent to the cost of operation, but 
I call your attention to the fact that he could not possibly do it. 

Mr. Brown. I do not believe he could, either. 

Mr. Hardy. Because the fuel would have been the same, and it 
would only be that much increase in labor. 

Mr. Brown. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. In wages. So the actual percentage of increase in the 
cost of running that boat on account of these four men would prob¬ 
ably not be 10 per cent, would it? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 69 

Mr. Brown. Probably. I will say it is not even that much. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, if your stoves paid a burden of 20 per cent 
^ditional, you would carry it, that seamen’s act burden? 

Mr. Brown. No; I would not. You understand, I do not say you 
should take the entire law off of these boats. I believe we should 
have a reasonable law, and understand me that I have not at any 
time said that the seamen’s law is absolutely the whole cause, but I 
do say that what we are getting is the effect which the shipowners 
say is caused by the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Hardy. That is just the point I am coming to. I have no 
interest in shipping. I live in the middle country that has no ship¬ 
ping, and I have no interest in it at all, but I want the’public to be 
well served. 

Mr. Brown. That is us. 

Mr. Hardy. And I want the seamen to be protected against oner¬ 
ous and inhumane burdens. I want as high wages as are necessary 
to give the men an opportunity to live, and live decent lives. 

Mr. Brown. We do too. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want is a fair adjustment of this matter, and 
if they are taking off the ships and calling it the seamen's act, I 
want to find it out. But these boats that are leaving your quarters 
must be going somewhere, must be doing something. 

Mr. Brown. I do not understand they are; they are tied up. 

Mr. Hardy. Bight now everything is tied up. 

Mr. Brown. That is true, but, of course, we can not take this 
present moment as to what we are going to do. 

But here is another feature along the same line that we have been 
talking about- 

Mr. Hardy. While I am on that, let me call your attention to what 
is suggested to me, that the total wage cost in these ship freight 
charges is about from 7 to 9 per cent, so that the addition- 

Mr. Brown. We said less than 10 per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes, we considered that less than 10 per cent of the 
whole. 

Mr. Brown. So we really had gotten there before you got your 
suggestion. 

But another thought that struck me was this. I do not know how 
everybody takes it, but I believe that I would rather be employed 
continuously at a little less rate of pay than I would spasmodically 
at a higher rate of pay. There has been a whole lot said about this 
two-watch system. I say this, that if a man is sufficiently interested 
in his position, if he likes his position, and it is evident that a man 
does if he continues to work at it, he does not care whether he is 
working 8 hours, 6 hours, or 16 hours. That is my personal view. I 
work a great many days; in fact, when the case warrants it, I work 
24 hours. I could not stand 24 hours, day in and day out, because my 
health would not stand it, but I would say this, that I will at any 
time attempt to give my employer all I have in me, and if 8 hours 
are all he wants, well and good, but I do ask from the employer that 
he keep me on steady. If he finds it necessary to lay up some of his 
boats so that he can only employ me spasmodically, I think I have 
lost something, even if he does keep me around late hours. 

Mr. Hardy. In order that it may go in the record, and you may 
make such suggestion as you see proper, it has been suggested to me 



70 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 


that the total wage cost in freight is about 7 per cent, and transpor¬ 
tation about 12 per cent; therefore, if you increase the wages 25 per 
cent, you would not increase it quite 2 per cent of the total freight 
cost; so it seems to me that the claim, that by reason of requiring 
more men in the operation of these vessels they are being taken out 
of the service, is a little exaggerated claim. I want to know if your 
freight would not bear an increase of from 2 to 5 per cent, your 
water-freight rate, provided you could get the service? 

Mr. Brown. I will answer that in this way. The freight would 
not bear it, but we would have to take it out of our own profits. I 
do not know if it is a question whether or not we are making a suffi¬ 
cient profit.* Perhaps we are on some of our products, perhaps not. 
So it is not a case whether they will bear it or can not bear it. They 
are not going to bear it. 

Mr. Hardy. When they added 2 per cent to the water-freight rates, 
would you not still be below any railroad rate ? 

Mr. Brown. But our prices are not made on railroad rates, nor 
water rates, either one. Our prices are made to meet competition. 
Now, it does not necessarily signify that that competition has moved 
at all by rail or water. 

Mr. Hardy. If they move it by water they have the same advan¬ 
tage that you have. 

Mr. Brown. We have the same advantage; so it looks like a fixed 
proposition either way, as far as that is concerned. 

Mr. Hardy. If they move by rail you have got an advantage. 

Mr. Brown. Provided it moves the same distance that we move 
ours, to meet the same competition. 

Mr. Hardy. When you move your freight on water 50 or 60 miles 
it does not cost much, does it? It is the loading and unloading that 
is the main cost ? 

Mr. Brown. Of course, I do not know what enters into the makeup 
of a water-freight rate. 

Mr. Hardy. I will tell you this much about it, Avhich you all know, 
that the water charges for freight from New York across the ocean 
are not half equal to what they are for a distance of 100 miles to the 
interior. 

Mr. Brown. Talking about rates, you must not lose sight of this 
item either, that, as I understand it, a passenger rate and water rate 
applies, we will say, from Third and Jefferson Streets, in Detroit, 
Mich., at the D. & C. Dock, to your water front in Cleveland, you 
understand, but a freight rate on the railroad applies from the door 
of our warehouse to the door of the warehouse of the man in Cleve¬ 
land, provided he is situated like we are, on a team track, or if he 
has a private spur. 

Mr. Hardy. That is true, but that is because of the fact that the 
facilities for loading and unloading at many of the water wharves 
and landing places have been practically discontinued, have they 
not? They have a little place down here in Georgetown where they 
used to haul freight on that canal, but now it would cost more to 
get it from the landing place than it did to haul it there, because 
they have no facilities. 

Mr. Brown. I do not know what the cause is, but the effect is 
there, nevertheless. If we take a car load of stoves, that represents, 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 7l 


roughly, 10 truck loads of stoves, and the 10 trucks going to the D. 
& C. dock in our city. Those trucks will make about two trips a 
day. Each truck will load a carload of stoves on the D. & C. boat. 
A truck in Detroit is worth about $25 a day. That is what they 
charge for a truck and I assume they charge approximately the same 
in Cleveland for a truck. That is $50 added to the water rate. 

Mr. Hardy. But the whole thing means terminal facilities for 
your water routes. You do not need terminal facilities for your rail 
routes. 

Mr. Brown. So, as a matter of fact, what I am getting at is this, 
that if you do get a cheaper rate by water, you are really paying 
a higher rate from the point of shipment to the point of final des¬ 
tination ? 

Mr. Hardy. Unless you get some better terminal facilities. 

Mr. Brown. Unless they will take it from your warehouse and de¬ 
liver it in the other man’s warehouse. 

Mr. Hardy. But the seamen’s act has nothing to do with the extra 
cost at the terminal? 

Mr. Brown. No, and the seamen’s act has nothing to do with 
freight raising or lowering, but what I am getting at is its bearing, 
its effect. You can not raise water rates any more. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think, even with your terminal cost, that rail 
transportation is nearly as cheap as water transportation? 

Mr. Brown. I think it is about; in fact, I know from actual ex¬ 
perience, and I can show you the figures on that. 

Mr. Hardy. Well, if that is the case, the water transportation—— 

Mr. Brown. Is as high as rail transportation; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. If that is the case, water transportation is going, with¬ 
out any amendment to this act ? 

Mr. Brown. I do not agree with you, because one feature you are 
losing sight of, and that is that water transportation does give us 
service—absolutely they give us service. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the advantage, so that you would rather pay 
a little bit more? 

Mr. Brown. It is not a case whether we would rather or not; we 
must. If a man in Cleveland phones this afternoon and says “ I want 
so many stoves to-morrow morning,” and he knows there is a means 
whereby we can deliver those stoves to him to-morrow morning, and 
we do not deliver the stoves to-morrow morning, we will never get 
another telephone call from that man. 

Mr. Hardy. I think you are absolutely correct, but you are re¬ 
versing the argument that is always made here, that water trans¬ 
portation goes dead because the rail can give a more desirable service. 

Mr. Brown. I do know what our own experience is, from actual 
figures. I know that we pay more from our warehouse to the man’s 
warehouse at the other port. You can see this when you are taking 
into consideration the trucking you have had to do at both ends ot 
the line. The trucking costs real money. 

Mr. Hardy. I know that where you have no terminal facilities 

you have got to pay for it. . 

Mr. Brown. In Detroit they have no means of delivery to the 

various warehouses. _ J ^ , , . 

Mr. Hardy. Then you will never do much good to the water busi¬ 
ness without getting those facilities? 



72 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13 , AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Brown. But we do get one advantage—we get service, and that 
is the thing in Detroit that we must give, and especially during the 
last three years that has not been given. Right now you would be 
surprised to know the difference in the conditions under which you 
must sell goods nowadays. When a man takes an order nowadays, he 
puts on that order when it is to be delivered, and there are not any 
“ ifs ” or “ ands ” about it. That applies both to rail and water, but, 
nevertheless, we have the advantage of a lot of people on account of 
the water, and I want to be real frank and say to you that there are 
a lot of people in New York City that we are selling goods to because 
we can deliver the stuff there better than they can in Ohio, and 
there are some big stove companies in Ohio, too, but their stoves 
have to travel by rail, because they are located in Cincinnati, Colum¬ 
bus, and those interior cities. 

Mr. Scott. Let me ask you a few questions, and see if we can not 
clear this thing up a little bit. How long have you been in Detroit ? 

Mr. Brown. I came there in 1915. 

Mr. Scott. Was the water service better when you came to Detroit 
than it is now ? 

Mr. Brown. About 150 per cent, I expect. 

Mr. Scott. So, regardless of what the cause may be, the service 
that you received in 1915, as compared with now, was 150 per cent 
less? 

Mr. Brown. It is 150 per cent less now. 

Mr. Scott. That is the way I meant it. Now, your shipments of 
stoves constitute a very small percentage of the cargo on board any 
ship? 

Mr. Brown. I should say they do. 

Mr. Scott. You are a traffic man. Is it not an actual fact that on 
the shipment of farm products, peaches and plums and grapes, the 
margin is very close ? 

Mr. Brown. It is my understanding that it is. 

Mr. Scott. And not only is the margin close, but the feature of 
prompt delivery is one of the great essentials, is it not ? 

Mr. Brown. Service. 

Mr. Scott. The ships that you use not only derive a portion of the 
revenue from freight, but they also derive a larger portion of their 
revenue from another important asset, which is eliminated in thq 
question of Mr. Hardy, and that is the passenger service, is not that 
a fact ? 

Mr. Brown. That is true. 

Mr. Scott. Of course, when you send a shipment of stoves you do 
not send them a bunch of passengers down with the stoves, do you ? 

Mr. Brown. No ; we do not. 

Mr. Scott. So, outside of the freight this boat is carrying, in order 
that you may get the service the boat has to also get that freight, and 
be able to carry a reasonable number of passengers on board to make 
up enough money to cover the operating expenses and give the owners 
of that ship a reasonable return on their investment? 

Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. Incidentally, along that same line, my un¬ 
derstanding is that these same boats take, for instance, stoves and 
kindred commodities. Detroit is more or less a stove manufacturing 
town. We take them to all these places where this fruit is pro- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 73 

duced, and those other farm products, and they get a return load 
coming to Detroit, because Detroit absorbs all of that stuff that is 
grown in the country, and incidentally they absorb our products 
that are manufactured in the city, so it keeps the boat loaded in both 
directions. 

As far as the life-raft matter is concerned, I heard a gentleman 
make a statement one time while I was on one of these boats that if 
you had sufficient lifeboats and life rafts on there to take care of all 
the people that were on the boat you could not get all the people 
that the boat was allowed to carry on it; there was not sufficient 
cubical capacity in the boat to handle that many lifeboats and life 
rafts. I do not know whether that is the fact or not, but I have 
heard that statement made on a boat. 

Mr. Scott. You are also interested in another feature suggested 
by Mr. Gahn here, and that is the continuation of the service neces¬ 
sary which has been operating during the past few years since the 
adoption of the La Follette Act. 

Mr. Brown. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. You have had shipments that you sent out before the 
15th of May? 

Mr. Brown. I should say we have. 

Mr. Scott. And after the 15th of September? 

Mr. Brown. That is another thing I was going to come to. From 
the middle of June to the middle of August the stove industry, you 
may say, is practically fair. Our biggest months are March, April, 
May, and June. That is when all our gas stoves are going out. Then 
we start in the latter part of August with the shipment of coal and 
wood stoves. The only thing that is moving in the summer time 
are the furnaces, which move 12 months in the year and are not sea¬ 
sonal at all. But the gas stoves do move early, and the coal and 
wood stoves do move late. In between those two times we have more 
service than we need, but when we want the service most is when 
they start taking it off, and when we lose the best part of it. 

Here is another feature about Michigan. I do not know whether 
you want to put it in the record or not, but the northern part of 
Michigan is filled with thousands and thousands of deer and other 
game. 

Mr. Scott. And fish? 

Mr. Brown. And fish; especially deer, though for the late season. 
The season on deer has been from November 10 to November 30, and 
it certainly is much more pleasant to me, and I believe the majority 
of people like to travel on a boat better than they do on a train. 
You can take the D. & C. boat from Detroit up there, and there are 
thousands of people that go up there, and that includes sailors, 
farmers, and everybody else. They all go up there deer hunting. 
If we take the boats off there, we have got to go on the train; that is 
all there is to it, and you are lucky if you get standing room on there 
in the late fall. I do not know what your Mackinaw division boats 
hold, but suppose they held 700 or 800 people. That would be a fine 
thing to have going up there, and there are a lot of us who have as¬ 
pirations to go deer hunting. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you in favor of taking off the life rafts and life¬ 
boats on the vessels in the winter ? 


74 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Brown. No; I am not. This is exactly what I am in favor of. 
I imagine I am in favor of this bill because I believe this amendment 
was drafted by men who have by their association with boats the 
ability to draw up a reasonable act. 

I have read the act, but, of course, I can not say that I have 
digested the whole works, but 1 do think it looks like a reasonable 
proposition. So many people are in favor of this amendment that 
1 can not see why I should stand up alone and say that I am not in 
favor of it. I have told you men what little I do know about boats 
and their operation, and it looks to me like a very important proposi¬ 
tion. I do not know whether it is a cure-all, but I do say it looks 
to me like it is a good thing. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to get at is whether the boats are leav¬ 
ing the service. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. He has not suggested that any of them have left 
the service. 

Mr. Brown. I understand the Mackinaw boats have. 

Mr. Scott. They took off four boats. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That may be, but not so far as this witness is 
concerned. 

Mr. Brown. I thought that was all understood. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Nothing is understood. 

Mr. Brown. I thought that was understood from the fact that I 
could not route that shipment to Put in Bay. You have got to go 
there by boat. I can not route it because I do not know there is any 
boat running there. So far as I know all the boats to Put in Bay have 
been taken off, and as far as I understand, the boat on the Mackinaw 
division of the D. & C. has been taken off. There is one other boat 
that I have just heard of recently, and that is the White Star Line 
boat. I understand it is not necessary to take them off, but they are 
going to curtail their boat service so that it will not give us service. 

Mr. Scott. How about the service to Toledo ? They did not run a 
boat to Toledo last year, did they? 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I would like to suggest that if you have anyone 
here who can certify to the fact that boats have actually been taken 
off by reason of the hardships of this bill, that we would like to hear 
from him. All I have heard so far is that they would like to have 
this amendment because they think it would be helpful. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Fletcher and other gentlemen have testified that 
ships have been taken off every year; that they have been losing one 
ship a year. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I recall the names of three that have been 
taken off. 

Mr. Scott. There have been four taken off of Put in Bay, and 
Put in Bay is a flyspeck alongside of the rest of them. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Let us hear from the rest of the pork barrel. I 
recall the names of four that have been taken off of Put in Bay. 
The Tourist was one. 

Mr. Scott. The Kirby and the Lakeside . The Lakeside is an ice 
crusher. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Not a passenger boat at all? 

Mr. Scott. A passenger boat, certainly, the biggest ship we have 
up there. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 75 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That is three. 

Mr. Scott. Then there was the Arnold. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That is four out of a total of how many? 

Mr. Brown. There are two boats on the Arnold Line. One goes 
up to Sault and one to Mackinaw Island. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman. Our time in Washington is limited, 
if you will pardon me for making that statement. We are here on 
urgent business, and we must get back as soon as possible. I wish 
I could introduce a man to you this afternoon who will say that he 
will run ships under present conditions. While we are talking about 
theories, please bear in mind that ships are not running. It is a con¬ 
dition that confronts the gentlemen who are here from the Great 
Lakes. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Mr. Maclean, can you give us something definite 
as to the name, tonnage and the routes of the ships that have been 
abandoned since the seamen’s act went into effect, and when, and 
with a statement that cause of it was the injustice of the seamen’s act 
alone, and not general industrial conditions? That will give us 
•some facts. 

Mr. Maclean. Before taking up that matter, if you will pardon 
me, as we are in a hurry—we will take that up very thoroughly— 
I wish now to call on Mr. L. C. Macomber, the traffic commissioner 
of the Toledo Chamber of Commerce, to tell you of the conditions in 
Toledo, and I would like this committee to ask Mr. Macomber for 
any information they desire. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I would suggest at the beginning to let him 
kindly give the names of some of the ships that have been taken 
off the routes, due to the conditions brought about by the seamen’s 
act. I sympathize with the statement of the captain that handles 
the tug boats, but of course he is not handling general traffic and 
general freight, and the same is true with the gentleman here who 
lias a fish boat. 

Mr. Scott. If I may be indulged in just a moment, I will say this 
for the benefit of the committee. For five years we have been trying 
to get an amendment to this law. All the efforts in that direction 
have been made by the boat owners themselves. They have come here 
and flooded this committee ever since I have been on it with testi¬ 
mony beyond bounds, and they have never been able to get anywhere. 
Now, it has sifted back into the interior, and little by little our 
boats have been taken off, and I thought it was a wise procedure in 
presenting the evidence to the committee to show the conditions of 
he people who do business with the ships. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That is all very good. 

Mr. Scott. I do not want to impose on the committee, but I want 
to show you a situation up in the country in which I live that is 
terrible, and after I get that in, then I will presume to call on the 
ship operators to show you in detail just hoiv many ships have been 
taken off. Now, a number of people are down here to show you that 
it is affecting the farmer, whose sole means of support for himself 
and his family is potatoes, and his corn and his wheat that of necessity 
he must ship by water. He can not ship it by rail. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I have never served on this committee before, 
and I did not have the benefit of the knowledge as to what ships 
have been taken off. That is the thing that interested me. 


76 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. I will show you just how many ships have been taken 
off and the tonnage. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And why they have been taken off ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Thank you. 

Mr. Maclean. If I may be permitted to make an explanation, I 
want to say to the members of the committee that the delegation 
before you to-day is not representing, as Congressman Scott has 
pointed out, the vessel owners. I believe we have with us a number 
of men who are the owners of vessels. We shall be glad to call them 
later. They have come here to hear the testimony of the men who 
ship goods and the men who desire to use the service. I will now call 
on Mr. L. G. Macomber, the traffic manager of the Toledo Chamber 
of Commerce, Toledo, Ohio. 

STATEMENT OF ME. L. G. MACOMBER, TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER, 
THE TOLEDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, TOLEDO, OHIO. 

Mr. Macomber. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I 
do not presume to be able to offer any testimony as to the ability of 
the carriers to operate under the seamen’s act. I do know this, how¬ 
ever, that prior to 1920 we had the D. & C. service in Toledo. In 
1920 the D. & C. boats failed to cooperate. We corresponded with 
Mr. Shonts, the president and general manager of the Cleveland & 
Detroit Boat Co., and my experience with Mr. Shonts would lead me 
to believe what he says, and his reply to me was to the effect that the 
boats were taken off because of the seamen’s act. I do not know 
whether he was correct or not, but I do know this, that our experience 
in 1920 and for several years prior to that indicates very clearly to 
us the necessity of transportation facilities, and the improvement in 
our persent transportation facilities. 

You men in Congress undoubtedly have heard a great deal re¬ 
cently about our American transportation system, about its apparent 
breakdown during the war and about the* possibility of its being 
unable to operate in the future, and something about the necessity 
of some relief to our present transportation facilities. I do know 
this, that whether or not the La Follette bill or the seamen’s act is 
responsible for the D. & C. boats being taken off in any way, it is a 
contributing factor, and if in any way that contributing factor was 
unnecessary or a burden, there should be relief, because I believe that 
it is quite essential that this Congress direct its attention to the 
encouragement of transportation rather than discouraging it. 

Just a word with respect to freight rates. Considerable has been 
said here regarding the ability of the boat operators to raise their 
freight rates to take care of this labor increase imposed through the 
seamen’s act. First of all, before a package freight line can increase 
its freight rates, it has to file a tariff. If that rate is published in 
Connection with rail rates, that tariff has to be filed with the Inter¬ 
state Commerce Commission; if it is a port to port rate, that tariff 
has to be filed with the Shipping Board. Those laws that govern 
those tariffs are rather direct, in that those tariffs must be reasonable, 
nondiscriminatory, and that there shall not be a greater rate charged 
for a shorter haul than for a longer haul. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 77 


Let me illustrate. Harbor Beach has been mentioned here, and 
so has Port Huron. Perhaps this boat might increase its freight rate 
to Harbor Beach, because it was the only service that Harbor Beach 
has. We come down to Port Huron, however, and it is essential 
that that boat have some of the Port Huron business in order for it 
to operate. It can not depend entirely on this noncompetitive busi¬ 
ness. It must make up its cargo from some business to competitive 
points. It comes in competition at Port Huron with an electric line, 
and some roads serving common points. It can not publish a higher 
rate from Port Huron than the rail rate, because if it did, it could not 
meet the rate made by the electric line and by the railroad, and if it 
published a higher rate from Harbor Beach than from Port Huron, 
there would be discrimination. 

The same situation would exist, to use the Put in Bay situation, 
Sandusky or Toledo. The boat rate from Sandusky to Toledo is 
about the same as the boat rate from Put in Bay to Toledo. You 
have the same rate as from Sandusky to Toledo. If the boat han¬ 
dling Sandusky business remains for business at all of these ports, 
it must publish a rate with some relation to the rail rate, or it will 
not get the business. When that boat touched Sandusky before it 
touched Put in Bay, it could not publish a higher rate from Put 
in Bay than it did from Sandusky, so the ability of the boat oper¬ 
ators to adjust their freight rates is not entirely in their hands. 

Boat rates must be made, in my opinion, relatively lower than the 
rail rates, because industrial activities in this country have been built 
up in relation to the rail service, in other words, have been built up 
with rail terminal service. You will find the bulk of your indus¬ 
tries away from your water; in other words, freight must have 
either a truck or switch movement. That expense, in addition to the 
rail rates, must be given some consideration by the boat lines if they 
are to handle the business. 

As an illustration of that, the Willys-Overland Co. in Toledo may 
buy automobile parts from Cleveland, Ohio. If those automobile 
parts move by water, the Willys-Overland, in considering that move¬ 
ment, must take into consideration the total transportation expense, 
and that is made up of terminal costs at Cleveland, water movement, 
and terminal expense at Toledo. If the rate is unreasonably high, 
the boat does not get that business. The boat has got to fix its rate 
with regard to some of that business cultivated already, so that it may 
take care of th£ business essentially required. So that the boat rate 
can not be unreasonably high. 

Toledo is served by 14 steam roads, and by that I mean 14 railroads 
running out into the country. It would seem apparent that with 14 
railroads our transportation service would be adequate so that we 
would have no particular concern with water service. That is not 
true, however. That depends materially upon the boat service be¬ 
tween Toledo and Detroit, because of the congested terminals at 
both ends of the line, in so far as the railroads are concerned, and 
everywhere, so far as the electric lines are concerned. We naturally 
are concerned with embargoes on the railroads, both the steam and 
electric lines, and very frequently on the water routes, so we have 
to depend a great deal on the water service. The freight rates 
between Toledo and Detroit are exactly the same by water as they 


78 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


are by rail; there is absolutely no difference. The water rates 
between Buffalo and Toledo are exactly the same as they are by rail: 
there is no difference. Yet we are using that service. 

Some of us can remember without much effort that within less 
than a year ago we were confronted with transportation congestions 
and embargoes, and the inability to obtain empty equipment, etc. 
Some of us are rather apprehensive that we will be confronted by 
this condition again if business resumes anywhere near normal con¬ 
ditions. Having in mind the transportation situation and the con¬ 
dition the carriers are in, and taking all those things into considera¬ 
tion, we feel that every transportation facility should be encouraged 
rather than discouraged, and we feel that this water rightfully be¬ 
longs to us, and we feel that we ought to be given the privilege to 
use it. 

I am not prepared to say whether or not the seamen’s act is a bur¬ 
den. My discussion with the boatmen seems to indicate that it is 
one of the influential reasons why we have not the service that we 
experienced two years ago, and why we were not given an in reasecl 
service, and I desire to emphasize my statement that if that is in any 
way a contributing factor it certainly should be taken out of the 
situation. 

For three months prior to the so-called business depression, or prior 
to last November, the New York Central carried a continuous em¬ 
bargo on the Buffalo gateway on merchandise business. That meant 
not only Toledo, but it meant your interior cities. You can go back 
as far as Nebraska, if you please, without being able to ship merchan¬ 
dise to Buffalo because of that embargo. If we had had a direct 
boat line from Toledo, that would have relieved the situation in that 
we could have consigned to Buffalo. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Have you ever had a direct boat line from To¬ 
ledo? 

Mr. Macomber. Yes; and have moved a lot of freight. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. When was that discontinued ? 

Mr. Macomber. I can not give you the exact date, but I have moved 
freight in that way. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. About how long ago? 

Mr. Macomber. I think it was five years ago. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That was before the act was passed then? 

Mr. Macomber. I do not think the act had anything to do with it; 

I do not know whether it did or not. It might have been the war 
feature that entered into. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. But there has not been any of that service in 
the last five years at all? 

Mr. Macomber. No. I am not positive about the date, whether it 
is 5 years, 4 years, or 3 years; I have not that information. 

Mr. Hardy. You are certain it is within 10 years? 

Mr. Macomber. I am reasonably certain of that. 

There is another feature that I think we should give consider¬ 
ation to, and that is the apparent desire of the present administra¬ 
tion to encourage inland waterways. We have an inland waterway 
through New York known as the Erie Barge Canal. That has just 
been put in shape, as I understand it, to Ottawa. If any of you 
men have had any experience in shipping through the eastern gate- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 79 

ways, you are thoroughly familiar with the fact that the Port of 
New Y ork. as well as the balance of the eastern gateways, are con¬ 
gested almost continuously when there is a normal business. We 
have got to find some relief for that, and it seems' to me that with a 
proper encouragement of navigation on the Great Lakes for pack¬ 
age freight, we might be able to find a through waterway from Lake 
Erie ports and from the interior, in connection with rail routes, 
through Buffalo, via the Barge Canal, not by continuous movement, 
perhaps, but by through freight rates, and* by transfer service at 
Buffalo. That is a thing we have been working on in Toleclo for 
some time, and something we hope that we will be able to accom¬ 
plish. 

At the present time our rail service is quite satisfactory, but at 
the present time there is practically no business for the railroads, 
and those of us, who, as I said before, have studied the situation, 
are apprehensive as to the conditions that will confront us when 
business again becomes normal. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that Erie Canal now being used? 

Mr. Macomber. It is; yes sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I know that for many years, it practically was a dead 
investment for the capital, was it not? 

Mr. Macomber. It has just recently been improved, I believe you 
understand, so that it will accommodate the modem traffic. 

Mr. Hardy. Have not the railroads found a way to get the best 
of it yet? 

Mr. Macomber. Well, I do not think they really found any way 
to get the best of it. 

Mr. Hardy, What became of the traffic that once made that canal 
famous? 

Mr. Macomber. I might answer that in this way, that all of our 
transportation facilities, if you have given any study to transporta¬ 
tion conditions and transportation history, you will find that one 
has outgrown the other; one has taken the place of the other. When 
that barge canal was first built and established it served a very im¬ 
portant factor in the transportation game, as the tonnage reports 
will indicate to you, but it outgrew the requirements. One passed 
out of date, with the result that it has only recently been improved, 
and certainly must contribute to the transportation situation. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes; but I know, as a matter of fact, that the trans¬ 
portation on the Mississippi River died. 

Mr. Macomber. It is moving now, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And it has absolutely disappeared. 

Mr. Macomber. There is business moving down the Mississippi 
River now, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. A little. 

Mr. Macomber. Let me tell you something about the Mississippi 
River. Let me tell you what the Mississippi River is doing with 
Illinois grain at the present time. The freight rate on Illinois grain 
from the interior of Illinois, central Illinois to New York is 44 cents. 
That grain can be taken into Cairo, assembled there and put in boats, 
and is being generally shipped to New Orleans for 31 cents. That 
is just exactly the important factor the Mississippi River is playing 
in connection with Illinois grain at the present time. 


80 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me supplement that by saying that the same re¬ 
sult was had from Memphis to New Orleans on cotton. They re¬ 
duced freight rates there because of the water competition down to 
17 cents per 100 pounds. It is about 500 miles. The result was the 
taking of the boats off of the river. They come into my State, where 
they have got no water transportation, and charge 55 cents, three 
times as much, for the same kind of traffic. The railroads have 
absorbed the traffic by lower rates, and then at an interior town they 
raise it, and you destroy the traffic by water until finally they cease to 
have terminal facilities, and if you can get cheaper water transpor¬ 
tation your terminal facilities work it up so all these things enter 
into the question of your boats leaving transportation. 

Mr. Gahn. Not on the lakes. 

Mr. Macomber. With regard to the freight rates, let me remind 
you that since that time the Interstate Commerce Commission has 
been appointed, and the act to regulate commerce has had some teeth 
put in it, with the result that the Interstate Commerce Commission 
now has jurisdiction over those rates, and with the result that within 
the past six months the rail carriers have been refused a reduction 
in their rail rates in the New Orleans territory, with the result that 
their rates have been increased, to do away with that violation. 

Mr. Hardy. The condition I spoke of prevailed for 20 years after 
the Interstate Commerce Commission had been in operation, as to 
New Orleans. 

Mr. Macomber. There are a lot of things that happened that are 
not happening now. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Can you tell us how many boats the D. & C. 
boat line operated ? 

Mr. Macomber. I think there are two boats in there, running from 
Mackinaw Island to intermediate points. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. They were entirely discontinued in 1921? 

Mr. Macomber. Yes, sir, we had no boats last year, and Mr. Shonts 
advises me it is due to the seamen’s act. I do not know whether Mr. 
Shonts is correct or not, but as I see it, it must have had some very 
influential effect on it, or Mr. Shonts would not have made that state¬ 
ment. If it had any bearing whatsoever, and it was unnecessary, I 
think it ought to be relieved. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. When was that statement made to you ? 

Mr. Macomber. Last year, I will send you a copy of"the letter, if 
you would like to have it. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I will take your word for it. 

Mr. Macomber. Let me cite you an illustration. To-day there has 
come into being a transportation industry which is known as the 
baby transportation industry, and that is the motor transportation 
industry. The motor transportation is playing a very influential 
part to-day in boat traffic and in rail traffic. Take between Toledo 
and Detroit, for instance. We have motor truck competition. Motor 
truck competition operates on the same rates as the railroads, and 
the same rates as the boats. That motor truck competition is not 
governed by any laws, State, Federal, or otherwise. For instance, 
they can load a Ford bus up with 20 people, and take them out and 
run them against a telephone pole and kill them, and there is not any 
law to reach them except the common law. If you have read the 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 81 


newspapers or cared to gather information, you have found out that 
there have been more people killed on the Dixie Highway in the last 
two years than have ever been drowned on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Furuseth. May I be permitted to ask the gentleman a 
question ? 

The Chairman. Just one moment. Before you ask any questions, 
I want to ask you a question. I have here a newspaper clipping 
which makes the following report of something which occurred in 
Boston on Sunday night, and I want to know if you made this 
statement. 

Mr. Furuseth. Last Sunday night? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir; a week ago Sunday night. Were you in 
Boston a week ago Sunday night? 

Mr. Furuseth. I was in Boston two weeks ago. 

The Chairman. And you spoke at Ford Hall? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Now, the statement is this: 

A court is no more sacred than royalty was. When they serve an injunction 
on me I will disobey it. I’ll travel that road if I have to travel it barefoot 
and alone. 

I want to ask you if you made that statement ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I want to qualify that- 

The Chairman. There is no qualification. 

Mr. Furuseth. There were qualifications to it. 

The Chairman. What qualifications did you make ? 

Mr. Furuseth. It would take a little time to tell you, if you want 
them. 

The Chairman. Let me read further: 


These are the words of Andrew Furuseth. president of the International 
Seamen’s Union, at Ford Hall in this city on Sunday evening. And he is the 
man who will lead the now threatened strike, if it comes to pass. 

How do we expect an American merchant marine to compete with other na¬ 
tions on the high seas if our seamen are responsive to such a leader as this? 
Only the other day our Supreme Court, by a vote of five to four, decided against 
the profiteering landlords, taking a position which conservative people call 
socialistic. And yet this labor leader denounces the courts as instruments of 
autocracy, and urges the army that marches behind him to disregard their 
devices for orderly procedure. 


Now, I ask you whether that is true or not? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is not true. 

The Chairman. Not true? 

Mr. Furuseth. In the same sense it is put there it is not true. 

The Chairman. In these words? Did you state these words? 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not in that sense. 

The Chairman. “A court is no more scared than royalty was. 
When they serve an injunction on me, I’ll disobey it.” Did you state 


that? . 

Mr. Furuseth. I stated that, with certain very specific qualifica¬ 
tions, sir. 

The Chairman. What are the qualifications? 

Mr. Furuseth. The qualifications will take—if you want me to 
state them I will state them. 

The Chairman. I do not want you to testify until you clear your 


record. 


48420—21-6 



82 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. When the newspapers make a record against me 
I want to be put right and clarified. 

The Chairman. That was published on the 26 th day of April, and 
I have seen no denial of it at all. 

Mr. Furuseth. I never deny what is stated in the newspapers, 
because- 

The Chairman. Wait a minute. Tell me distinctly whether you 
said that you would disobey an order of the court. 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not in that sense. 

The Chairman. Well, there is no sense about it. 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not. 

The Chairman. What did you say ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I have not got what I said now. I can find what I 
said. The one thing I wanted to ask, Mr. Chairman- 

The Chairman. I object to your interfering at all in this hearing 
Until you clear your record. 

Mr. Furuseth. My record—how will I clear it? 

The Chairman. By a frank statement. 

Mr. Furuseth. Then I say now that the tvords quoted against me 
are not true, so help me God. 

The Chairman. Now, then, if that is true, if you want to ask 
a question, I will allow you to ask a question, but if your record 
stands there, and that is the first denial I have seen of it, and it has 
been out since a week ago Sunday- 

Mr. Furuseth. I just want to ask the gentleman, if I may, whether 
shipping, in any shape or form in the United States, is subject to 
common law or any other law with reference to the loss of life, or 
legally for the carrying of passengers, or whether it is not definitely 
limited as to liability under which there is no such thing as recovery 
on the part of a passenger or those who die or those who are injured 
as passengers on board a steamer, in any shape or form ? 

Mr. Macomber. That is a rather long question. 

The Chairman. I do not know anything about it, but let us get 
the answer to it, if you can give it. 

Mr. Macomber. I am not a lawyer, but I think I can answer the 
gentleman in this way. I think you have reference to this automo¬ 
bile that I referred to. This automobile man carried absolutely no 
insurance, and he owed for nine-tenths of that automobile; I do not 
know just exactly how his family could recover any damages, whereas 
they could against a railroad or against a boat line. 

Mr. Furuseth. Not against the boat? 

The Chairman. That is entirely outside of the hearing, so far as 
I know. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit me, I would like 
to ask at this time, without interrupting the witness, Mr. L. C. Wil¬ 
liams, of the city of Detroit, to reply to the question that has just 
been asked. 

Mr. L. E. Williams (representing the United Fuel & Supply Co., 
Detroit, Mich.). Replying to that question, in two specific instances 
within the last two years our company has had two men lost over¬ 
board, in both cases without any liability on the part of the boat, in 
that the boat was not a contributor. Both of them fell overboard, 
and in both cases, in a suit in the civil court they lost. Both of 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 83 


them lost their lives, but the courts held that there was no liability 
on the part of the boat, because the boat was not negligent. One of 
these men was walking along the railing, and he stumbled and fell, 
and in the other case the man w T as climbing over a pile of coal, and 
sli ed. 



Mr. Hardy. Mr. Macomber, I want to say, to begin with, that I 
agree with you in your initial statement, that if the D. & C. had to 
take off their boats because of the La Follette Act imposing a burden 
which w T as not necessary, I am in favor of removing those burdens, 
or if there is any unnecessary burden, whether it contributes or not, 
I do not believe in putting on an unnecessary burden, but that is only 
just to state my position in the matter. But did I understand you 
to say that the rail and water rates between Toledo and Cleveland 
were not the same as between Buffalo and Cleveland? 

Mr. Macomber. The rail and water rates between Detroit and 
Toledo are the same. 

Mr. Hardy. Between Detroit and Toledo? 

Mr. Macomber. Between Detroit and Toledo they are the same. 

Mr. Hardy. I might have been wrong. I had it Toledo and 
Cleveland. 

Mr. Scott. He said that there was no service between Toledo and 
Cleveland. 

Mr. Macomber. The rail and water rates between Cleveland and 
Buffalo are as follows: Kail rates, 89J; water rates, 87. 

Mr. Hardy. So that there is only 2J cents difference? 

Mr. Macomber. Practically the same. 

Mr. Hardy. Has that water rate got to bear your extra terminal 
charges? 

Mr. Macomber. To handle the business; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. By which sum total of the terminal and water-route 
rate must be greater than the rail rate? 

Mr. Macomber. I know the water route is higher. 

Mr. Hardy. Why is it that the people patronize the water route 
under those circumstances, because they get better service? 

Mr. Macomber. Well, there is a certain class that appreciates that 
that service would not be more expensive. There is a certain class 
of shippers to whom that would not be more expensive, for instance 
such shippers as do not happen to have private sidings. There is a 
certain percentage of those shippers that would have to truck their 
freight over to the rail or water haul. 

Mr. Hardy. Is there any combination or joint ownership between 
the water vessels and the rail routes that you spoke of ? 

Mr. Macomber. Not since the Panama Canal act. 

Mr. Hardy. There is no interlocking or overlapping directorates? 

Mr. Macomber. No, sir. We did have at one time a joint service. 
The Lehigh Valley operated a fleet of boats up to Buffalo. They 
bad the biggest freight house in the United States, I think, at 


Buffalo. 


Mr. Hardy. How do you account for the possibility of rail being 
able to carry freight as cheaply as by boat ? It can not do it, can it ? 

Mr. Macomber. Hardly, vdien you take into consideration that 
rails are moved in units of 50 tons, and in almost 700-ton units by 
boat. It is not reasonable that they could compete, and there is 


84 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

something wrong somewhere, and it needs very careful consideration. 
There is not any reason in the world, in my estimation, why we ought 
not to have very materially reduced rates on the Great Lakes than on 
the railroads. 

Mr. Hardy. As business men, do we not all know T that a boat carry¬ 
ing many hundred of tons, without any track repairs and overhead 
charges like the railroad, can beat the railroads at least two to one 
on rates ? 

Mr. Macomber. Not two to one, because they do not have the period 
of operation, to begin with, and they have a certain amount of over¬ 
head and upkeep for their boat, which will be an expense. 

Mr. Hardy. It is not admitted that vessels can carry freight 
through the canal around to New York quite a bit cheaper than can 
be done over the land? 

Mr. Macomber. That is a materially longer haul. 

Mr. Hardy. How long is the haul between Buffalo to Detroit, or 
those two places you spoke of? 

Mr. Macomber. Two hundred and six miles. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you quite sure that that differential of only 2J 
cents did not cover the terminal charges too ? 

Mr. Macomber. Yes; I am absolutely correct on that. 

Mr. Hardy. It seems to me so unreasonable that something must 
be wrong, as you say. That is all I wanted to call attention to. I 
just wanted to emphasize that. 

Mr. Scott. I think we ought to have one more witness, and I sug¬ 
gested that Mr. Myer from Sandusky testify, but it has been sug¬ 
gested across the table that we had better put some other testi¬ 
mony on. 

Mr. Maclean. I will introduce Mr. Frank H. Myers, director of 
the Sandusky Chamber of Commerce. 

STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK H. MYERS, DIRECTOR, CHAMBER OF 
COMMERCE, SANDUSKY, OHIO. 

Mr. Myers. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, at the outset I would 
like to say that I have no ax to grind with either the shippers or the 
boat owners. I represent the Chamber of Commerce of Sandusky, 
Ohio, a city located between Cleveland and Toledo, a town of 25,000 
inhabitants. I am interested in the chamber of commerce as a di¬ 
rector. My business is that of a merchant running a large depart¬ 
ment store; and it seems to me that any law which does not function 
the purpose that it sets out to do for the people all along the Lake 
regions is a law that should be changed by all means; and when I 
say to you gentlemen here that this law, as I understand it, the sea¬ 
men’s act, is causing an inconvenience to the people who are living 
upon these islands—Kelleys Island, Put in Bay, North Bass, Middle 
Bass, which are approximately all practically 12 to 25 miles from 
Sandusky; and that those people are coming into our store from time 
to time and complaining of the service—I believe it is time that this 
Government commenced to take a hand in the affairs and find out 
exactly where the trouble lies. We have a boat by the name of the 
steamer Arrow , which makes daily trips from Sandusky to Put in 
Bay. This boat starts on the 1st day of April and runs generally 
up to December 1. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 85 

Mr. Briggs. How large a vessel is it? 

Mr. Myers. A boat that will practically hold from 800 to 1,000 
people. This boat—imagine it, gentlemen—can go to Put in Bay, 
start out from Put in Bay in the morning, and I am quite sure that if 
the men who framed that bill would have to stay on Put in Bay, if 
there were 100 or 400 Congressmen who had to stay on Put in Bay 
from the 1st day of April to the 15th day of April and could not 
get off of that island, they never would have made or enacted that 
law. Think of it! Here are practically 500 people on Put in Bay 
and on Kelleys Island and other islands. This boat starts out from 
Put in Bay in the morning at 6 o’clock. She can only take 80 people 
by the enactment of that law. Her capacity is over 800 people, and 
if there were 100 people come down to that dock at 6 o’clock in 
the morning there were only 80 that the boat could take. To the 
other 20 the captain would have to say, you will have to stay home. 
She then in turn stops at Kelleys Island, which is a distance of 
about T to 8 miles, and here are people who have been anxious all 
the winter through to come to our city to do their trading and to do 
their shopping. She stops at Kelleys Island and that happens, and 
the same thing at Middle Bass. So there are 50 to 75 people on 
that dock waiting to come to Sandusky, anxious to come, been penned 
up all the winter long, and the captain says, “No; we have got our 
capacity. We have got 80 people on this boat. We can not carry 
any more, and therefore you will have to stay here.” I would like to 
have some of the Congressmen stand there for all that length of 
time since that was enacted, and change that law. 

There is no more danger from the 1st of April up to the time that 
this law goes into effect, and there is no more danger on the Lakes 
up to December 1 than what there is up to September 15, and yet 
after September 15 none of these people can go to Sandusky, only 
80 at a time, because of that seamen’s act. It is my humble opinion 
that this act should be changed to read from April 1 to December 1. 
After that time those people on those islands are all housed up, with 
no railroad facilities whatsoever, with practically almost 2,000 people 
living upon those islands. It is an injustice to them; it is not right. 
I have told you that there is no more danger upon those waters all 
the while they are running than what it is merely for the short time 
they are running. We have just as nice weather there in November 
up to December 1 that there is in May, June, and July, if you please. 
There is no more danger then than what there is before, and why 
deprive those people of coming out on that boat if they so choose ? 

These people grow peaches and they grow grapes. It is their 
livelihood. I do not know what is confronting the other gentlemen 
that you have heard before me. They are there, away up, 200 to 400 
miles from where I am, but I do know this, and I as a business man 
would put it to you just in this way, that there is one thing that 
confronts a man that is in business. When he gets an overhead that 
is so much that he can not make it, he goes to the law. You may 
drive these men that own these vessels, or I might put it this way, 
you might drive a horse to water but you can not make him drink. 
You might drive these men that own these vessels so that they will 
not run these vessels. What becomes of the people all through that 
section who number into the thousands. That is the thing that has 


86 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

to be corrected. These men are in business for a profit the same as 
I am as a merchant, and when they can not make a profit they are 
going to quit. Take the steamer Kirby . The steamer Kirby has 
plied between Sandusky and Detroit for as many years as I can 
remember, and I) have been living in that section 45 years, and I 
do know that last year the steamer Kirby was taken off. 

I do not know all of the proposition. I do not know these men. 
I am here only to say that this section of the country should be re¬ 
lieved. If the seamen’s act is the cause of it, repeal it. If it is the 
cause of it, I say divorce it from that bill entirely and make new laws 
to confront the situation which we are up against. I have no ax 
to grind with labor. I want to see high wages. It is better for my 
business and better for everybody else as far as that is concerned, 
but when you take ships off labor has nothing to do whatsoever, and 
that has been the cause in the case of the steamer Kirby. The Kirby 
to us is not of vital importance. We run a very large store and we 
are dependent to some extent upon these people who live upon these 
islands, and they like to come to the city to do their trading. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you mind telling me what has become of the 
Kirby? 

Mr. Myers. The Kirby , as I understand it, is lying in the Detroit 
yards doing nothing. I do not know what the reason in it is or 
anything about it. I am only here to tell you as a man who has got 
nothing to do with those shipping interests whatsoever my view. I 
do not care, but what I am here to find out is what is the reason 
these boats are being taken off, and why are the people of those 
islands deprived of that pleasure. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me ask you a question along that line. The rail¬ 
roads all claim they are losing money. Suppose they would stop 
and cease carrying? What would you suggest Congress do? 

Mr. Scott. They cannot stop. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not know about this, unless we give these boats 
a subsidy, whether they will get any boats running. 

Mr. Myers. The whole thing is that those people need a volume of 
business. The tourist business only comes once during the season. 

Mr. Hardy. But if they lose money they will stop, whether it is 
from the seamen’s act or not. 

Mr. Myers. They can get a volume of business because the prices 
are less. We have increased our business in our little city of 25,000 
inhabitants, up to the present day; that is, three months of this 
year, over $20,000 from last year,* and that is through the volume 
of business from lower prices. Just as soon as these vessel men 
increase the rates on their ships, I want to tell you they will lose 
business and people will not travel, if you put on higher rates or the 
same rates as those you have to pay on the railroad train. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it true that boats are being tied up and goods 
stopping going across the ocean ? 

Mr. Myers. The hardest period is what we are passing through 
now. I think the periods 1892 and 1907 that we passed through we 
passed through nice and had those boats running. We always did 
have the boat Alaska running from Detroit and the steamer Kirby 
running from Detroit. 

Mr. Hardy. When did the steamer Kirby quit ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 213, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 87 

Mr. Myers. Last year. 

Mr. Hardy. How long had the seamen’s act been in force then ? 

Mr. Myers. I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. It had been in force since March, 1915. Why say it 
stopped it last year and had not stopped it up to then? 

Mr. Myers. I think the gentlemen who have been running these 
boats may have had reasons for that. I do not know the reason. I 
am not acquainted with that. You can not question me on that, be¬ 
cause I am simply a merchant. I am only here to find out why these 
boats can not run. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not want to put a single burden that is not neces¬ 
sary, either for the protection of the men or safety of lives at sea, on 
any ship. I want to do exact justice to all these ships, but the mere 
fact that some ship is paid off and is tied up when ships are tied 
up all over, in other countries, and railroads are not making any 
money, does not, to my mind, satisfy me that there is some defect 
with the seamen’s bill. 

Mr. Myers. But the fact remains, though, that these men are los¬ 
ing money, as they say, after that, and they have tried it for the last 
three or four years and given up in despair. There is something 
wrong, and people tell me it is because of this seamen’s act. We are 
as much different from the ocean on the fresh waters of our lakes 
as day and night, it seems to me, when we come down to the differ¬ 
ence of a boat on the ocean and on the lakes. They should not be 
connected at all together. I can not figure why people figure out 
that they should be treated alike. 

Mr. Chindblom. You said you have increased your volume of 
business immensely during the first three months of this year. Is 
that general with business men or with business men in the Great 
Lakes region? 

Mr. Myers. I can not say. This is an illustration. When you 
talk about increasing the rates—say, for instance, it costs 75 cents 
to go to Put in Bay where it used to cost 50 cents—you do not 
increase the volume of business, and the people do not go as often 
or ride as often. I give that as an illustration, because the rates 
practically are almost the same now. The freight rates, as I under¬ 
stand—and I have it right here, as I just got it from the clerk of 
the chamber of commerce—are first, second, third, fourth, fifth, 
and sixth class on the steam roads 62^ cents and on the electric 
packet road $1.03. The rail rates are 59 cents for first class; sec¬ 
ond class, 53 cents; and the water rate 49 cents. It is not quite 20 
per cent. It is not over 10 per cent cheaper. The third-class rate is 
42 cents, and the water rate is 38-J cents; fourth class is 31J cents 
as against 29^ cents; fifth-class rate is 22 against 20; and the sixth- 
class rate is 17-J cents against 15J cents. There is not 20 per cent dif¬ 
ference. There is not over 10 or 15 per cent difference between the 
rates. We have a passenger rate, wdiich is on the steam road going 
to Detroit, of $4.06; electric road, $2.71; and the water rate from 
Sandusky, $1.25. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the electric rate ? 

Mr. Myers. $2.71. 

Mr. Hardy. And the rail rate is $4 ? 


88 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Myers, $4.06. A lot of those people prefer to ride from San¬ 
dusky to Detroit, but the steamer Kirby is now taken off. She is a 
vessel that carries freight and passengers. 

Mr. Jefferis. How far is it from Sandusky to Detroit ? 

Mr. Myers. About 80 miles. 

Mr. Scott. By rail ? 

Mr. Myers. By rail. 

Mr. Scott. How far by water ? 

Mr. Myers. I can not say. I hear it is 111 miles by rail and by 
water 75 miles. The secretary of the Chamber of Commerce gives 
me these figures. 

Mr. Briggs, When did you say the Kirby was taken off ? 

Mr. Myers, Last year. 

Mr. Briggs, Did she run profitably up to that time ? 

Mr. Myers. They tell me she paid three years ago, and last year I 
understand they lost money. 

Mr. Scott. You mean the year before that? 

Mr. Myers, The year before that they lost money. 

Mr. Briggs. Did the traffic hold up pretty well during the previous 
time up to two years ago ? 

Mr. Myers, Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. They were operating then under the seamen’s act, 
were they not ? 

Mr. Myers. I do not know. 

Mr. Briggs. That went into effect in 1915. 

Mr. Myers, Mr. Dustley might explain that. 

Mr. Gahn. Before 1915 were any of these island boats laid up ? 

Mr. Myers. No, sir. 

I would like to say that in Sandusky we are not only a freight 
boat. We have only one boat going to these islands. These people 
come over and talk to me and say, Why don’t you get that boat 
changed? Why don’t we have the Kirby running here the same as 
it used to, so we could get to your place of business? The Kirby 
leaves Detroit at 6 or 7 o’clock in the morning and leaves Put in 
Bay or Kelleys Island along about noon. It was very advantageous 
for those people to take that boat to go to Sandusky to do their 
trading and go back on the 4.30 boat. It gave them business. That 
business is taken away from them. 

Mr. Briggs. Who operated the Kirby? 

Mr. Myers. Mr. Dustley. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you had any assurances that with the relief 
that is asked for, about extension of time of season, that the Kirby 
would continue to operate? 

Mr. Scott. And the other changes as well ? 

Mr. Myers. If they have these changes they will continue to 
operate, 

Mr. Briggs. I am speaking about this change in the length of 
season. 

Mr. Myers. • Yes. You can see by this illustration; for instance take 
the chamber of commerce. We had decided to run an excursion from 
Put in Bay from the island to Sandusky. I did not known any¬ 
thing about the seamen’s law and never looked into it and the 
chamber of commerce went ahead and got all the data that was 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 89 

necessary for it to get, the tickets, and decided to have an excursion 
on the 1st of October or the 15th of October. We did. The captain, 
when he got on the dock, left the dock that morning there, and some¬ 
thing like 300 people wanted to go to Put in Bay. He could only 
take 80. It was fine weather. 

Mr. Rosenblum. How many of them were on the boat at that time ? 

Mr. Myers. He could only take 80. 

Mr. Rosenblum. All those at Put in Bay. How many passengers 
on the boat? 

Mr. Myers. He could only take 80. There were something like 
300 there. There is no reason why this act should not be changed 
to read after December 1, when the boat lays up. I can not see any 
reason. 

Mr. Hardy. Can they run in summer time and carry 800 passengers.. 

Mr. Myers. Between seasons in the summer time? 

Mr. Hardy. Do they run during that time? 

Mr. Myers. It runs all during that time. 

Mr. Hardy. Is there trouble with these lake men in having equip¬ 
ment for life preserving? 

Mr. Myers. I can not go into that. You gentlemen should find out 
those things. 

Mr. Briggs. All you know is it simply does not run. 

Mr. Myers. I only know it does not run, and that is what I want 
to have corrected. 

Mr. Maclean. Our committee expects to get through in a short 
time if you will show us a little indulgence. We have a very im¬ 
portant witness here from Port Huron ? Mr. E. W. Kiefer, president 
of the chamber of commerce of that city, and also president of the 
Port Huron Sulphite & Paper Co. 

The Chairman. We will hear him. 

Mr. Kiefer. This section is at the head of the St. Clair River. 
The town has 28,000 inhabitants in which we live. There are a num¬ 
ber of towns along those 30 or 40 miles of river built up by water 
transportation. Port Huron is only one of these toAvns and the only 
town of that section that has any rail transportation worth speaking 
of. It has the Grand Trunk running east and west. What other 
railroads there are through there are the Pere Marquette and the so- 
called Handry Brother’s logging road that runs up the shore. The 
business of this section is salt, and there are about 100,000 tons of 
salt shipped out from our city, which has the largest salt mill in the 
world, and the other two towns next down are St. Clair and Marine 
City. It requires coal to bring that salt to the surface and evaporate 
it. This coal is obtained at Toledo. The reason that that business 
is in this section is the cheap water rate to bring the coal to it. An¬ 
other important piece of our business is pulp and paper. The rea¬ 
son that is located there is that the pulp wood is brought down to 
the Great Lakes primarily at Port Huron and shipped westward into 
Kalamazoo largely. Kalamazoo is the largest paper-making section 
in the West, making book and magazine paper. There is very little 
or no news paper made in Kalamazoo. 

The situation in regard to this seamen’s law is that the bulk of 
this business is carried in small vessels of the type and class that 
Capt. Crosby was speaking about, 1,000-ton steamers. The coal 


90 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

comes up in them and the salt goes out in them, and the pulp wood 
comes in on them. As I say, there is nearly a half million tons of 
freight handled that way. That coal comes up from Toledo. It 
takes one of these boats eight or nine hours to run down to Toledo 
and about twice that length of time to come back against the current. 
Under this law she is required to carry one extra fireman, two extra 
coal passers, and an extra cook. As Capt. Crosby shows you, it 
costs between $4,000 and $5,000 to carry these extra men. The vessel 
is in port from two to three days unloading, and she is only running 
less than 24 hours, at the best from 8 to 12 to 15 hours in getting the 
coal. In getting wood she goes to the bay, which is a run of 24 hours, 
is in port four or five days loading, and is another 24 hours coming 
back again. The Sault River run is the same. The Lake Superior 
run is a run of about three days with the same three or four days in 
port at either end. These men have absolutely nothing to do either 
when the ship is at sea or when she is at port. A boat of that kind 
will carry about 4,000 cords of wood in a year’s time, and it costs 
$4,000 more to operate her under present-day wages under this law 
than it would if we were without the provision of law as to these 
extra men. That means $1 a cord. 

I am a pulp and paper manufacturer and I want to tell you what 
we are up against. That $1 a cord on the 20,000 cords of wood 
means $20,000 extra that we have got to pay for na purpose. The 
people we are competing with are located in Canada where we get 
our wood. We can afford to pay $3 a cord on freighting our wood 
down, which would be $60,000, because they have got to come to 
Kalamazoo with their product the same as we have. The rate to 
Kalamazoo is 20J cents a pound. That is $4 a ton; 10,000 tons is 
$40,000. The rate to Kalamazoo is 45 cents a pound. On the same 
10,000 tons that is $90,000. There is $50,000. Against that we have 
got to pay $60,000 on the freight. But we have a shorter haul on 
the coal and a shorter haul on the sulphur to compensate for bring¬ 
ing our wood down. The coal proposition works out exactly the 
same way. One of those vessels will carry a thousand tons in about 
four days’ time. The extra cost is about $100. In other words, it 
costs about 10 cents a ton more to carry these useless men. 

Mr. Hardy. Do these boats carry nothing but coal? How many 
tons of coal ? 

Mr. Kiefer. They will carry about 1,000 tons. 

Mr. Hardy. You have got 20,000 cords of wood? 

Mr. Kiefer. Our concern brings in about 20,000 cords of wood. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you the only concern that patronizes this vessel 
that carries 1,000 tons? 

Mr. Kiefer. No; the salt companies carry in coal and carry out 
salt. We are the only company, that patronizes them as far as 
taking in pulp wood is concerned. 

Mr. Hardy. The total increase in cost of their operation by reason 
of these four additional men amounts to four or five thousand dollars. 

Mr. Kiefer. Per year on each vessel. 

Mr. Hardy. How many cords of wood will each vessel haul? 

Mr. Kiefer. She will haul approximately 400 cords, makes 10 
trips carrying 400 cords, which is 4,000 per vessel. 

Mr. Hardy. That is 4,000 cords in the whole year? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 91 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Carrying anything else? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes; they carry some coal, too. She will run in about 
5,000 tons of coal in the season. 

Mr. Hardy. How do you figure out that when they have to increase 
their cost of operation by these four men, these four or five additional 
men, that when it gets to you it runs to $20,000 on your wood alone. 

Mr. Kiefer. Because we have got to carry 20,000 cords of wood 
and it takes four or five of these vessels to carry in this wood. I am 
giving you the cost on one ship. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you said one ship would carry 10,000. 

Mr. Kiefer. I said 4,000. I said she would make 10 trips. That 
vessel carries 1,000 tons. 

Mr. Hardy. And it carries coal back, and you have to pay $1 a 
cord, or $4,000, so as to totally wipe out this extra cost of labor. 

Mr. Kiefer. We certainly have to meet that to get them to run 
at all. 

Mr. Hardy. Have you any figures of what per cent this extra cost 
would add to the cost of operating that ship ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Exactly. 

Mr. Hardy. What? 

Mr. Kiefer. It costs about $30,000 to operate a vessel of that kind 
of which $20,000 is labor. 

Mr. Hardy. So instead of labor being 10 or 12 or 15 per cent it is 
about 66f per cent ? 

Mr. Kiefer. It is not hard to figure at all. There are IT men on 
a boat of that kind under this law. Those IT men in wages will 
draw down between $18,000 and $19,000, and that is the first cost 
under labor and your food. Food is directly proportionate to the 
number of men on the boat. You have a cost of about $6,000 for 
coal, a couple of thousand dollars insurance, and a couple of thou¬ 
sand dollars more for ship repairs. 

Mr. Hardy. That is, $10,000 ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Engine repairs will run about $500; laying up and 
incidentals will run another thousand. 

Mr. Hardy. That is, $11,500? 

Mr. Kiefer. And you will run about $30,000 to operate a vessel to¬ 
day of that kind. 

Mr. Hardy. Not counting anything up for the wear of the vessel? 

Mr. Kiefer. Without counting any depreciation or amortization or 
whatever you want to call it. On that, if you can operate with 11 
men or 13 men, we figure it will cost $4,000 or $5,000 less between 
food and wages. 

Mr. Hardy. Then you put all of that on your wood to make it $1 
a cord ? 

Mr. Kiefer. It amounts to $1 a cord. If you can get the vessel to 
operate that much cheaper you are in shape to compete against them. 
The Canadian has a government railroad making him a rate, which 
hauls his stuff 500 miles for the same price that our railroads haul 
our stuff for 120 miles. They have got practically a 45-cent rate 
straight down to Kalamazoo, and we pay a 20^-cent rate. They had 
to come to Port Huron to get to Kalamazoo by rail. 

Mr. Hardy. Then we are having a little trouble with the railroad 
rates, too. They charge us a little excessive. 


92 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Kiefer. The Canadian railroad rates into American territory 
are made to build up Canadian business. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes. 

Mr. Kiefer. The Canadian marine laws are made to build up Ca¬ 
nadian business. Their coal can go up there cheaper, or their freight¬ 
ing is on a cheaper basis then what ours is. It will cost our town 
at least $25,000 more to handle their coal, about the same amount for 
salt, and $20,000 more to handle the wood by reason of this law. 
We would not object to it if these men had anything to do, but this 
class of vessels that handle that particular business are in port load¬ 
ing and unloading at least two-thirds of their time. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you a ship operator yourself? Do you operate 
a ship? 

Mr. Kiefer. I do not operate ships; no, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You are only giving from what has been reported to 
you as the items of cost? 

Mr. Kiefer. I am a stockholder in shipping companies that do all 
that and I know what their costs are, and I came into this business 
from the shipbuilding business. My previous connection was with 
the American Shipbuilding Co. That was before the seamen’s law 
went into effect. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me ask you about these wages. You said the 
seventeen men cost $18,000, which is a little over $1,000 apiece? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Are not those extra men the lower wage or are they 
the higher wage crew? 

Mr. Kiefer. No, they are the lower wages. 

Mr. Hardy. What does each one of these extra men cost? 

Mr. Kiefer. One hundred dollars a month. 

Mr. Hardy. If each costs $100 a month, then you have got your 
wage cost too low. 

Mr. Kiefer. We are figuring down to the lowest possible. 

Mr. Hardy. That would be $1,200 for each man. 

Mr. Kiefer. Those men got $125 a month last year. 

Mr. Hardy. So that the 17 men would hardly be paid by $18,000. 

Mr. Chindblom. That is not for the whole season. 

Mr. Hardy. Were not the coal passers put on by the Steamboat- 
Inspection Service and not by any direct requirement of the law? 

Mr. Kiefer. I understand as an extra requirement of the law. 
The Steamboat-Inspection Service are the people that see that it is 
carried out. 

Mr. Briggs. The season for which these vessels run does not 
extend all through the year? 

Mr. Kiefer. About seven months. 

Mr. Briggs. And the other five months of the year the vessels are 
laid up? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes, sir. The vessels I have been speaking about are 
packet freighters. Port Huron suffers in that regard the same as 
other towns because the packer freight service has been cut out 
absolutely. It so happens, however, that there is an electric line 
running down to Detroit that can handle some of that and one rail¬ 
road from Port Huron down by which we can ship by rail, in which 
we are in a different position from these other gentlemen who have 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 93 


no rail connections and are totally dependent on vessels. Our packet 
freight is in the bean business, castings, and agricultural machinery, 
small agricultural machinery like cream separators and milling ma¬ 
chinery and the like which can move by rail. 

Mr. Briggs. When was your packet service discontinued or 
reduced ? 

Mr. Kiefer. That went out of service last year. 

Mr. Briggs. Up to that time had the packet service been operated 
at a profit? 

Mr. Kiefer. That I can not say, whether it was at a profit or not. 
The ship operators who operate those lines say not. We have not 
examined their costs. 

Mr. Briggs. But they had operated up to 1920? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes, sir; I am a stockholder in some of those other 
lines. I put money into Port Huron and believed in that territory 
because it had a chance for cheap water transportation, getting coal 
in. getting bulk stuff out in small boats. 

Mr. Briggs, There is a demand for commodities such that these 
packet steamers can be utilized to capacity to operate at a profit 
under ordinary conditions, according to your contention ? 

Mr. Kiefer. The freight service is there. That is, there is a 
sufficient amount of freight on a profit to keep them operating, I 
presume, to capacity. I do not know because I do not operate one 
of those lines and am not interested in them, from the beginning to 
the end of the season, but as I understand their contention they 
require passenger service to make the line profitable. They can not 
operate on freight alone. 

Mr. Briggs. As to the cost that you were giving a moment ago, 
in reference to the questions of Congressman Hardy, were they costs 
of which you were cognizant yourself or those you have heard of as 
actual costs ? 

Mr. Kiefer. I know that of my own knowledge. 

Mr. Briggs. Are those recent costs or costs some time ago ? 

Mr. Kiefer. The costs of this season. What we are up against 
this season is this: The pulp and paper market, like all other markets, 
is declining rapidly. Competition is very, very severe. On the com¬ 
petition we meet we had to look up every last cent to see whether w T e 
are going to do business at $1 or $2 a ton, and that makes a big 
difference in the volume of business of 10,000 tons when that pulp 
and paper business moves. I want to see what we can do to move 
that wood down at the cheapest and lowest possible margin of profit, 
and put our stuff into Kalamazoo at the lowest possible prices. We 
are met with a condition by which we figure out their lowest possible 
cost of operation. Their cost of operation last year on the cost of 
operation of a boat that I know of was $40,000. I had the state¬ 
ments in my office which were given to every stockholder—where they 
came out. They operated on—I was going to say at—I have for¬ 
gotten whether it is a loss or a gain, but either way it was $400 or 
$500. They paid the new requirements demanded and made an even 
break on it, and had a much higher freight rate at that time than 
at present. 

Mr. Briggs. Where do the shipping companies in which you are 
interested as a stockholder operate—on this line you are referring to? 


94 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes, sir; on that same pulp-wood business. 

Mr. Briggs. Are there any Canadian vessels engaged in that same 
service ? 

Mr. Kiefer. There are some. I think, about six that we own right 
in this district which in the last three or four years have gone over 
and changed their flag from the American to the Canadian flag. 

Mr. Briggs. Are they still operating? 

Mr. Kiefer. I could not say. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know whether they have suffered like 
the American vessels or not? 

Mr. Kiefer. I presume they are operating and running vessels, 
the Canadian companies. That is where most of them go, to the pulp 
and paper business on the Welland Canal locality, where they em¬ 
ploy these Canadian vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know whether they operate in a local way 
or not? 

Mr. Kiefer. They can not operate coastwise from American ports 
to American ports. All they could do was to bring in Canadian stuff 
to American ports. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I understand. 

Mr. Kiefer. And I understand there is some provision in the 
law by which if they do that they are compelled to use the same num¬ 
ber of men as the American. I do not know whether it is lived up to. 

Mr. Briggs. They do not operate there. 

Mr. Kiefer. The Canadians do not seek American business. They 
can get Canadian business. 

Mr. Briggs. Have the rail rates interfered with the water business 
as far as you know, with the business of the ships? Have you heard 
any complaint about that ? 

Mr. Kiefer. I should think the increase in rail rates has benefited 
vessels because they have gone up at least double, all the way 
around. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you heard anything to indicate that the cost 
of operating the ship has also increased correspondingly? 

Mr. Kiefer. These same vessels, vessels of that type, could have 
been operated for $15,000 or $20,000, if you turn back to prewar 
prices. 

Mr. Briggs. Ho you think the added cost of $5,000 per year for 
each of these ships was such as to put them out of business? In other 
words, the freight charges that we make would not have stood the 
increase so that they could have kept in operation. In other words, 
was that the sole cause of these vessels going out of business—this 
increase of $5,000 a year? 

Mr. Kiefer. There is no question of that. It is not simply an 
increase of five or six thousand dollars; $5,000 or $6,000 on $80,000 
is one-sixth or 16f per cent. I do not know what kind of business 
you are in or what you consider a fair profit, but any man that can 
keep going on 10 per cent profit in shipping or manufacturing thinks 
he is in clover, year in and year out. 

Mr. Briggs. What I ask is whether or not this increased cost 
could not have been covered in the increase of rates or would the 
traffic have stood that? 

Mr. Kiefer. The last two years you could charge anything and 
get away with it. We did not have any trouble and could pay $1 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 95 

or $2 a cord as long as we could get it. To-day we are down to the 
point where we have got to conserve every last cent if we are ^oin^ 
to live at all. ° ° 

Mr. Briggs. How long ago did this condition arise of which you 
are speaking? J 

Mr Kiefer. It has been going along two or three years that we 
ha\e been operating under this law and paying that additional cost. 
I hey charged that to us and we paid that to them. Thev were fair 
enough to the vessel owners. To-day we find we can not pay that. 
Ihey lay the cards on the table and say, “We can not operate any 
cheaper.” 

Mr. Briggs. Have they sought to raise their rates to cover these 
losses ? 

Mr. Kiefer. They did in the last two years: yes, sir; the rates 
went up. Before this seamen’s law was in effect they were carrying 
Rulp wood at $2.50 a cord. Last year the rate was $5 a cord, in 
some instances $5.o0, depending on the quarter from which it came. 

Mr. Hardy. Is not that about the increase that every other work 
has undergone since 1915; work that vou got anvwhere for $2 now 
costs $5. 

Mr. Kiefer. You could pay for it then. 

Mr. Hardy. Without regard to the seamen’s act, have you not 
paid double what you paid in 1915 for every other work? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. When that increased from $2.50 to $5 it was just keep¬ 
ing up with the rest of the procession, regardless of the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Kiefer. There is no question of it. 

Mr. Hardy. One thing puzzles me a little bit, because it was sug¬ 
gested to another witness that the wage cost of the freighter was 
only 7 to 9 per cent of the total cost of that freighting, but you 
make it about- 

Mr. Kiefer (interposing). Let us go into that specifically. 

Mr. Hardy. Just one moment. Does this vessel that carries your 
wood carry any passengers ? 

Mr. Kiefer. No, sir; it is not a passenger boat. 

Mr. Hardy. Nothing but freight? 

Mr. Kiefer. Nothing but freight. 

Mr. Hardy. And yet it, a thousand-ton vessel, has to have 17 men ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Seventeen men under this law. 

Mr. Hardy. No passenger-carrying vessel? 

Mr. Kiefer. These vessels have no passenger licenses and no pas¬ 
senger accommodations. They file no tariffs and are not common 
carriers and are known as tramps, lumber carriers. 

Mr. Hardy. What per cent is the labor cost—60 per cent? 

Mr. Kiefer. This is what the operators have figured out as their 
cost of operation this year; that is the lowest they can get down to, 
$80,000, and I know one of these vessels cost $40,000 to operate last 
year. The captain paid two wheelsmen $100 a month each, or $6.66. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that $166.66 or $100.66 ? 

Mr. Kiefer. One hundred dollars a month. I do not know whether 
those are the rates they are going to get or not, but they say that 
is the lowest they will get, anjwvay. There are two of them making 
$6.66—two lookouts at $6.66 a day. 



96 AMENDING SECTIONS 213, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Jefferis. Six dollars and sixty-six cents each ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Three dollars and thirty-three cents each. Deckhands, 
$5 a day for two of them, which is $75 a month; two coal passers, the 
same; three firemen at $100 each. That is $10 a day. One second 
engineer, at $5; first engineer, $7.06, or $212; cook, at $5; assistant 
cook, $2.50, or $75. That makes a total wage scale on the boat $69.88 
per day, which you might call $70, because there is some overtime, 
one thing and another. 

Mr. Chindblom. Are those union-scale wages? 

Mr. Kiefer. I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. How many months during the year do they operate? 

Mr. Kiefer. Seven months. You can figure it is going to cost 
$1.20 to feed these men per day. In other words, three meals a 
day at 40 cents apiece is as good as you can do. 

Mr. Hardy. You have got this per diem charge. Does that mean 
Sundays included? 

Mr. Kiefer. Absolutely; pay the same wages on Sunday as any 
other day. 

Mr. Hardy. 'So it is 30 or 31 days a month. 

Mr. Kiefer. And have to feed them on Sunday. They do not go 
hungry on Sunday. 

Mr. Briggs. Speaking about freight conditions, is it true that in 
the paper industry there has been an unusual demand for wood 
pulp in the last year from every source available in order to supply 
the shortage of paper in the United States ? 

Mr. Kiefer. There was, is you want to put it that way, a bull 
market last fall and a bear market now. Whether the demand was 
real or fancied is hard to determine at any time. There w T as a big 
buying market. I do not believe the consumption was any greater 
last fall than to-day. 

Mr. Briggs. All the wood pulp that could be imported into the 
United States was being imported from every source? 

Mr. Kiefer. Absolutely. 

Mr. Briggs. The paper mills in spite of that were working at 
capacity and unable to supply the demand for paper in the United 
States. Is that correct? 

Mr. Kiefer. They supplied the demand. There was no shortage 
of paper. 

Mr.. Briggs. The Public Printer here seemed to think there was 
quite a shortage. They talked considerable of it. 

Mr. Free. That is on account of the Congressional Record. 

Mr. Kiefer. It seems strange to any line of business that all of a 
sudden there is a great shortage where the same manufacturing 
capacity exists and only the same number of people in the country 
absorbing it. 

Mr. Briggs. I know Members of Congress were getting letters from 
country newspapers and so forth that they would have to close down 
their plants; there was such a shortage they would have to close down 
their plants. 

Mr. Kiefer. Some of the newspapers have got paper stocked up 
that they will not use until next summer. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not mean the country press because they did 
not have the capital to invest. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 97 


Mr. Kiefer. The big metropolitan papers when they see a rising 
market go in and buy. 

Mr. Briggs. In the coal situation, is there also business for hauling 
wood pulp in cargo carrying ? 

Mr. Kiefer. It is pulp wood they carry and not wood pulp. 

Mr. Briggs. That is used by the mills that convert it into pulp after 
they get the wood and that goes into the manufacture of paper? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. Was it not true that at this time all the vessels that 
could be kept in that service were being utilized for such purposes, 
hauling all they could get ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Last fall ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. 

Mr. Kiefer. Last fall we had all the boats that were available in 
that service. There was no question about that. You did not care 
what you paid. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, they could get the profit they wanted 
for hauling it ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Absolutely. 

Mr. Briggs. Was it not true that there Avas a pretty good trade in 
the coal trade about that time? 

Mr. Kiefer. Coal Avas a difficult proposition last fall. 

Mr. Briggs. From the beginning of the year. 

Mr. Kiefer. The coal trade is profitable to vessels. There aauis not 
the coal to be had. 

Mr. Briggs. No coal to be had? 

Mr. Kiefer. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. They did not get enough cargo on that to load 
capacity. 

Mr. Kiefer. They did not get cargo on coal at all. This, class of 
boats went out of service early last fall on account of the coal 
shortage. 

Mr. Briggs. What did they do in the spring or summer, a pretty 
good business ? 

Mr. Kiefer. This spring or summer ? 

Mr. Briggs. 1920. 

Mr. Kiefer. In 1920 the coal situation Avas very tense that year as 
far as getting cargoes of coal Avas concerned. Take the 10,000-ton 
fellows, they Avere always favored at the lower dock. The smaller 
so-called river steamers," lumber carriers, that we are talking about 
did not get good service there. 

Mr. Briggs. They did not get the business? 

Mr. Kiefer. No : no use of going down there with that little boat. 
The big 10,000-ton boats got the business every time, as they are 
easier to handle at the docks, and there is every reason Avhv the rail¬ 
road loading docks favor the larger boats. 

Mr. Free. You gave figures that shoAv the relative proportion of 
labor cost in the operation of these boats? 

Mr. Kiefer. Yes. I gaA^e you a record there of a cost of $70 for 
the labor cost. 

Mr. Free. Coal and so forth ? 

Mr. Kiefer. Your provision cost Avill run at least $20 a day for 
those 17 men; multiply that by 210 days— $18,900 or $19 000. Your 

48420—21-7 


98 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 


fuel will cost you $6,000; ship repairs $2,000 a year, if you can get 
away with it on that. You could not during the war, but that is 
near normal; every time you went to a shipyard with your boat, 
$2,000 to put in tAvo or three sticks. Engine repairs cost $500; in¬ 
surance at 15 per cent, $2,250; stores and supplies, $1,000; and fitting 
up, and laying up, AA T inter moorings, another thousand dollars. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you any assurances that if the length of the sea¬ 
son should be extended that these vessels would be put back into 
operation ? 

Mr. Kiefer. What kind of vessels ? 

Mr. Briggs. The ones you are talking about. 

Mr. Kiefer. With these bulk freighters the law does not concern 
them with their length of season. They can operate as early as ice 
will permit and as late a time. 

Mr. Briggs. You are concerned with getting a reduced number of 
seamen on the boat ? 

Mr. Kiefer. The same amount as before the law went into effect. 
These extra men we claim are useless. 

Mr. Daaus. Why do these boats operate only seA T en months out of 
the year ? 

Mr. Kiefer. That is about the length of time that lumber carriers 
are able to operate. As far as pulp wood is concerned, that is loaded 
in and out of water. By the time snow flies the smaller boats want 
to get off. The length of time for a \ T essel is eight months at best, 
and that is on the big steel ore carriers coming down Avith ore, great 
big 10,000-ton vessels. After December smaller vessels Avill take runs 
across the lake. Their season is seven months, 210 days. 

Mr. Briggs. Where is this traffic that used to be on these big 
steamers going noAv—by rail ? 

Mr. Kiefer. In our particular locality the stuff originating at 
Port Huron has to travel by rail, either electric or freight. There is 
considerable objection to it, but it is still moving. Further up the 
shore there is nothing, and it has simply ceased. Some of the river 
towns have neither rail nor electric, but they have packer freight and 
electric service, but not freight cars; it is by interurban cars which 
can handle some packer freight. 

Mr. Briggs. How does the cost of rail transportation on such 
freight compare with water transportation? 

Mr. Kiefer. Water transportation is cheaper. The rail rate at the 
present time on that class of goods would run about 16 cents a hun¬ 
dred for 60 miles into Detroit; the rate on a vessel would be 12 cents. 

Mr. Briggs. Four cents into Detroit. Is that based on the charge 
you referred to of $5 a ton? 

Mr. Kiefer. The charge that I was talking about before was on 
these bulk freighters. The bulk freight moves considerable distances, 
but figured doAvn to the cost basis on this operation- 

Mr. Briggs (interposing). What is this you are referring to now T ? 

Mr. Kiefer. You asked me about the packer freight and I was try¬ 
ing to answer you on vessels operating so-called passenger freights. 
They have published tariff rates. The bulk freighters have not 
published tariff rates, and operate simply on cost-plus profit basis. 

Mr. Briggs. That is about $5 a ton that you spoke about. 

Mr. Kiefer. The cost of operating a vessel under this law is about 
$1 a cord, $4,000 on $30,000 cost. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 99 

Mr. Free. From what kind of wood do you make your pulp? 

Mr. Kiefer. Spruce. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I 
am glad you were so much interested in the testimony given by the 
last speaker. I did not anticipate you would keep him as long as 
you did, and I was hoping to cormdete our testimony this afternoon, 
which will not now be possible. 1 would like to have the indulgence 
of this committee until noon to-morrow. 

Mr. Scott. I am anxious to meet the suggestion of the committee 
and to go ahead at 10 o’clock to-morrow morning. 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Thereupon, at 5 o’clock p. m., the committee adjourned to meet 
at 10 o’clock a. m.. Tuesday, May 3, 1921.) 


Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Tuesday , May 3 , 1921. 

The committee met at 10 o’clock a. m., Hon. William S. Greene 
(chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. MacLean. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as 
representatives of boards of commerce on the Great Lakes we are 
thoroughly interested in shipbuilding. Because ships upon the Lakes 
can not be run profitably, there is no demand for new ships, and 
for that reason our shipyards are closed. I would like you to hear 
this morning from a man Avho represents the shipbuilding interests 
in the sense he is a shipbuilder, and he is also here as the delegate 
of the Board of Commerce of Wyandotte, Mich. I would like to 
call on Mr. John G. Liddle, of Wyandotte. 

STATEMENT 0E MR. JOHN G. LIDDLE, WYANDOTTE, MICH. 

Mr. Liddle. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, as Mr. MacLean says, 
I am a representative of the Board of Commerce of Wyandotte, and 
also an experienced and working shipbuilder. I have worked in the 
shipyards in Wyandotte for many years. My father and brothers 
are "also shipbuilders. Since the Wyandotte shipyard was estab¬ 
lished in the year 1871, it might be queer to say it, but the shipyards 
never ran without a man by my name as an employee—my father, 
down through all the sons and the relatives. 

The shipyard has built almost all of the finest floating palaces 
that float on the Great Lakes, namely, the Detroit and Cleveland 
steamers and the C. and B. steamers—Cleveland and Buffalo. The 
steamers are recognized as the largest and finest passenger steamers 
in the world. We have also built other passenger boats, namely, 
several of the White Star Line which ply out of Detroit, between 
Detroit and Toledo, and also the Put in Bay steamers. We are all 
very proud of these steamers at Detroit. It makes it very pleasant 
for anyone living in the neighborhood or vicinity to go down to 
the docks and take these beautiful palaces for the different ports on 
the Lakes. We have more places of amusement to go to on these 



100 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^S ACT. 

steamers than any place on the Lakes. Yon take these boats for 
Port Huron, going through the Venice of America, namely, St. 
Claire Flats. Along these flats are located hundreds of beautiful 
summer resorts, extending from the clubhouse at the beginning of 
the canal to Port Huron. The other end of the destination of these 
ships is down south from Detroit to Toledo, Sandusky, and Put in 
Bay. They are also summer resorts. 

Another destination that these steamers ply between is Detroit and 
Buffalo, namely, the C. & B. Line. Many a traveling man from the 
West takes these beautiful palaces from Detroit to Buffalo on his 
way to eastern ports in preference to taking the rail. The Detroit 
and Cleveland boats ply between Detroit and Cleveland. This line 
is also taken in the summer time by many traveling men in prefer¬ 
ence to the rail. 

The steamers known as the Mackinaw Line ply between Detroit 
and Mackinaw. This is also another splendid summer resort—one 
of the most beautiful summer resorts on our Lakes. 

Our people in Wyandotte- 

Mr. Scott. I do not want to interrupt you, Mr. Little, but I think 
the committee would be particularly interested in the number of 
shipyards you have, the number of ways, and things of that char¬ 
acter. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. Mr. Scott, right along that line, so far as I am 
Concerned, I would like to hear about the effect of this act on ship L 
building, for instance. As to these other matters, I think it is con 1 
cecled these ships are out of business, and it is a disadvantage; but 
what I would like to hear from this gentleman is right on the point 
of the effect of the seaman’s act on this situation. 

Mr. Jefferis. And the necessity for this relief. 

Mr. Liddle. I might also say we have built at Wyandotte a large 
number of freight steamers and ferryboats of all kinds. The 
freight proposition on the Lakes is near to an end, as far as ship¬ 
building is concerned. They have now about 365 large freighters on 
the Lakes between 400 feet and 600 feet long. I believe that these 
freighters will be able to take care of the traffic on the Lakes in the 
grain, iron-ore, and Coal trade for some time, which will confine 
our shipyards at Wyandotte to the passenger business. They have 
not built any passenger boats at Wyandotte for about five years. I 
believe that the owners of the passenger boats were contemplating 
making additions to their fleets before the war came on and the 
seaman’s bill. When the war came on the yard was turned over 
to the Government. During the war we built more boats for the 
Government than any other yard on the Lakes. The number was 
about 58. 

Mr. Bankhead. Were those steel vessels or wood, many of them? 

Mr. Liddle. They were all steel, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. About what tonnage were those vessels ? 

Mr. Liddle. The tonnage I am unable to tell you at this time, but 
I can tell you the length of them. They were 261 feet. You could 
not build them any longer, because they could not go through the 
canals. 

Mr. Chindblom. For what service were they built? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 101 


Mr. Liddle. They were built for the carrying of grain, coal, or 
any kind of freight that the Government cared to handle—bulk 
freight, I should say. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you were talking about passenger ships. 

Mr. Liddle. Yes, sir. 

Mr. F REE. Are those vessels in commission now? 

Mr. Liddle. I want to explain the reason why we have not built 
passenger steamers in the last five years. 

Mr. Free. Where are those vessels now that the Government built 
during the war? 

Mr. Liddle. They are now down on the coast. They left Wyan¬ 
dotte as they were finished and were taken down on the coast. 

Mr. Briggs. Are those vessels what are commonly known as the 
Lake steamer type of vessel used by the Shipping Board ? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. About 2,500 tons; 1,800 and 1.500 dead weight. 

Mr. Liddle. Something about that. 

Mr. Chindblom. Were they of a uniform type; standard type? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes, sir. While these boats were under construction 
our shipyard launched one on an average of every eight days. Now 
the time has come when we believe our shipyard will have to depend 
on the passenger service. These boats take a long time to build; 
they cost a very large amount of money, and the consequence is they 
make a lot of work for the shipbuilders. 

I might say that the port of Detroit is somewhat different from 
other ports as far as the passenger business is concerned. We have 
very large automobile industries there and they are growing all the 
time, bringing people to Detroit, and I believe that if conditions 
w T ere such that these boats could run we would have a lot of contracts 
for passenger steamers in the future. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you mind my asking you right there: When 
did you finish the last passenger steamer? You said you had built 
none in the last five years. 

Mr. Liddle. I can not tell } r ou the exact date. 

Mr. Hardy. Can you get it for us and put it in the hearings ? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to know’ is when you delivered it and 
w r hen you contracted for it—the last one ? 

Mr. Scott. Plow 7 many yards have you at Wyandotte? 

Mr. Liddle. We have 10 berths and built 10 boats at a time during 
the war. 

Mr. Scott. What is the nearest other yard ? 

Mr. Liddle. The Great Lakes Engineering Co. is 6 miles north of 
Wyandotte. 

Mr. Scott. Flow large are they? 

Mr. Ltddle. They have eight stocks, a capacity for eight ships at 
once, and also a large floating dry dock to accommodate any boat on 
the lake. 

Mr. Scott. How 7 many ships are you building at the Wyandotte 
plant now ? 

Mr. Liddle. There are none building at the Wyandotte plant now, 
sir. The gates are practically closed and have been for some time, 
and w 7 e want to open them up again. 


102 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 


Mr. Scott. For how long have they been closed ? 

Mr. Liddle. They have been closed since last fall. I think since 
about October. 

Mr. Scott. In normal times, how many men do you employ in the 
yards at Wyandotte? 

Mr. Liddle. In normal times—that depends on how many boats 
we have on the stocks at a time. One boat will employ between 
four and five hundred men. 

Mr. Scott. How many boats are the Great Lakes Engineering Co. 
building at the present time? 

Mr. Liddle. The}^ are not building any at the present time. They 
just launched a boat about two weeks ago for Horace Dodge, which 
is a pleasure yacht. This boat is just about completed. They have 
no future contracts, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Bankhead. How many berths were there at the Wyandotte 
yard before the war? 

Mr. Liddle. Sir? 

Mr. Bankhead. How many berths or ways did they have at the 
Wyandotte yard before the war broke out? 

Mr. Liddle. We had ways enough there for eight boats. 

Mr. Free. You had eight ways before the war, and along in 1913, 
say. how many boats were you building? 

Mr. Scott. That is eight years ago. 

Mr. Newman. In response to the question a moment ago. I can 
give you the information right now. I think the last boats built by 
the gentleman’s firm was for my company. She was contracted for 
in 1912 and completed and turned over to us in June, 1913. I think 
she was the last commercial passenger boat built. 

Mr. Hardy. Contracted for in 1912 and turned over in 1913? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; I believe that will complete the record. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the name of your firm ? 

Mr. Newman. The Cleveland & Buffalo Transit Co. The name 
of the boat is the See-and-Bee. 

Mr. Free. What I would like to get at is what was your normal 
construction prior to the war? In other words, were you building 
one, two, or five boats a year ? 

Mr. Liddle. That would depend on the circumstances. Sometimes 
we would have one boat on the stocks and at other times we would 
have two or three or four. A shipyard does not always have all the 
ways filled. 

Mr. Scott. But your yards were always going prior to the war ? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes. In answer to that question, I might say at 
intervals—and I will tell you why I say that—on the Lakes steam¬ 
ers are contracted for so as to start them in the fall of the year and 
to have them ready for the spring season. The consequence is that 
about the 1st of June, or, I will say the 15th of June, until along 
about the 1st of September, it sometimes is our dullest season in 
shipbuilding on the Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. Has your company any contracts for future construc¬ 
tion at the present time ? 

Mr. Liddle. No, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Liddle, we would like to have you state, if you 
have any opinion upon it, how the passage of this pending resolution 
would affect the shipbuilding trade. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 103 

Mr. Liddle. I know so. 

Mr. Bankhead. How would it have that effect? 

Mr. Liddle. Because the seaman’s act has made things so that the 
owners of the boats can not run them at a profit, and any man who 
can not do business at a profit will be compelled in a short time to 
quit the business. If the boats are tying at the dock instead of being 
in commission and making money, I feel very certain that the owners 
will not build any more boats until they have the boats they have 
already built busy. 

Mr. Free. Mr. Liddle, can you give us any idea as to the additional 
expense in operating, for instance, a passenger boat? We have testi¬ 
mony here, and perhaps Mr. Maclean is going to present the testi¬ 
mony— 

Mr. Scott. Are you an operator, Mr. Liddle? 

Mr. Liddle. No. 

Mr. Free. You see my idea? 

Mr. Scott. I understand, and we intend to present all that. 

Mr. Liddle. I believe, in answer to your question, some of the other 
gentlemen coming on after me will be better able to answer that than 
I will. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Liddle, where are all these vessels you constructed 
in the last four or five years? Have they been put into service? 
They are not on the Lakes, are they ? They were not steamers to be 
used on the Lakes, but in the coastwise trade ? 

Mr. Liddle. They were built for the Government and are down 
here on the coast. 

Mr. Briggs. When was the last steamer you built for use on the 
Lakes constructed? 

Mr. Liddle. Do you mean for the Government? 

Mr. Briggs. No; I mean for anybody—that your shipyard con¬ 
structed for use on the Lakes, freight or passenger, it makes no 
difference. 

Mr. Liddle. Why, we built two freighters last fall, or last summer, 
rather, of the 600-foot class. Those were the last two boats. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you any under contract now ? 

Mr. Liddle. No. 

Mr. Briggs. When were the last passenger vessels constructed that 
you built for service on the Lakes ? 

Mr. Liddle. This gentleman, Mr. Newman, just answered that ques¬ 
tion. 

Mr. Briggs. I am speaking about your concern. That is not your 
concern, is it? 

Mr. Liddle. The boat he refers to was built at our yards. 

Mr. Briggs. Oh, I see; it was built at your yards. Did you ever 
have much building before 1915, much boat building, for service on 
the Great Lakes? This last steamer referred to here by this gentle¬ 
man-— 

Mr. Liddle. That was the last passenger ship. 

Mr. Briggs. That was the last passenger ship. Did you have any 
freighters after that time up to 1915 ? 

Mr. Liddle. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Briggs. How many, approximately ? 

Mr. Liddle. I can not tell you the exact number, but I would say 
about six a year, not being absolutely certain, for the year previous to 




104 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

the war. Some of these boats, I believe, were built by the Hall Coal 
Co. I think those were the last boats. 

Mr. Briggs. Were they of about the same capacity as those freight¬ 
ers you have just constructed? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes, sir; about 261 feet long. 

Mr. Briggs. About what tonnage? 

Mr. Liddle. The tonnage I am unable to tell you, because I do not 
pay any attention to that. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know the character of those ships? 

Mr. Liddle. I am not a naval architect, nor am I a ship engineer. 
I am a little shipbuilder. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you know how many of those 365 vessels built 
on the Great Lakes were put into service after we got into the war? 

Mr. Liddle. After we got into the war? 

Mr. Bankhead. Yes; since April, 1917. 

Mr. Liddle. I could not answer the question as to how many. 

Mr. Bankhead. Where can we get that information? 

Mr. Liddle. Where could I get the number? 

Mr. Bankhead. Yes; that were put into service. 

Mr. Liddle, I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean we built six freight ships the year before 
we got into the war? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes; I think that was about the number. There might 
have been more. 

Mr. Hardy. When was that—1916? 

Mr. Liddle. Somewhere about that time. 

Mr. Briggs. Those ships were built for private concerns? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes; and fetched down here to New York and sold 
to the Government and probably went in the war service for the 
Shipping Board. I think some of them were sent to France, or over 
to the old country. 

Mr. Scott. In order that there may not be any confusion in the 
record the witness has said the last freight ships, as he remembers 
it, w T ere built for the Hall Co. The committee will recall the Hall Co. 
are operators on Lake Ontario, and these are coal ships. 

Mr. Hardy. What I want to get at is how many ships they have 
built from year to year. As I understand, the last ship was built 
last summer. 

Mr. Bankhead. The purpose of my question is to determine what 
proportion of the existing tonnage on the Great Lakes was put in 
under the stress of war emergency and what proportion of it was for 
normal business before the Avar. 

Mr. Scott. As I remember the witness’s testimony he testified his 
concern built in years past, prior to the Avar, approximately 365 ships. 

Mr. Liddle. No ; excuse me. I say there are 365 freight steamers on 
the Lakes. The number of ships our company has built is about 290. 

Mr. Briggs. Within Avhat period of time, Mr. Liddle? 

Mr. Liddle. Why, since the yard Avas established. 

Mr. Briggs. What date Avas that ? 

Mr. Liddle. The yard was established in 1871, but- 

Mr. Briggs. Hoav many of these vessels have been built since the 
Avar ? 

Mr. Liddle. How many have been built since the Avar ? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 105 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. 

Mr. Liddle. Freighters? 

Mr. Briggs. Y'es. 

Mr. Liddle. Two. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean since the war began; how many ships have you 
constructed of that number—that two hundred and some odd ? 

Mr. Liddle. Do you mean for the Shipping Board ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; for the Shipping Board or others. 

Mr. Liddle, Well, I said a few moments ago that our yard built, 
I think it was, 58 boats during the war period. 

Mr. Briggs. Fifty-eight during the war period? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. That is, from the time the war started in 1914 ? 

Mr. Liddle. That was for the Government. 

Mr. Hardy. You built that many for the Government ? 

Mr. Liddle. Yes. I am pretty sure that that is the number. 

The Chairman. Y r ou can furnish that detail, naturally? 

Mr. Liddle. Y^es*, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I wish, for the benefit of the committee, to cover the 
question asked by Mr. Briggs, you would furnish a tabulated state¬ 
ment of the vessels you have built since 1912, and including 1912, 
each year, and whether for the Government or private owners—pas¬ 
senger and freighters. 

Mr. Liddle, I can get that for you. 

Mr. Hardy. Suppose you go back to 1910. 

Mr. Rosen bloom. Are there any other ways on the Lakes that are 
large builders of boats? 

Mr. Maclean. If the committee desires, I have just noticed another 
shipbuilder who has come in, and he can probably throw some further 
light on this subject. 

Mr. Chindblom. Mr. Chairman, let me suggest, instead of this 
statement with reference to this one private concern, if we could get 
a general statement showing the shipbuilding activities on the Great 
Lakes for the last 10 years, including all shipbuilders on the Great 
Lakes, that w T ould be of some value. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. For each year, the completion by the different 
yards. 

Mr. Liddle. I might say, in answer to that question, you can get that 
data from the Marine Review. If you will have your secretary write 
to the Marine Review, they will give you the information. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to know when the ships were begun and when 
they were completed. 

Mr. Liddle. The Marine Review can give you all that information. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know how many of those vessels built 
during the war are now idle or in operation ? 

Mr. Liddle. I could not say; no. You see, I live at Wyandotte, 
and these boats are down on the coast. 

Mr. Hardy. Have your yards offered to build ships at prices much 
cheaper than the going tonnage price here a few years ago ? 

Mr. Liddle. I could not answer that question, because I am not 
one of the directors or officials of the shipbuilding company. I am a 
workingman. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know anything about prices? 

Mr. Liddle. No, sir. 


106 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13 ; AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 


Mr. Jefferis, Do you know whether or not those 365 large freight¬ 
ers are being utilized for freight purposes now pretty generally or 
not? 

Mr. Diddle. This is early in the season, of course, and they are not 
all at work. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Did they work last season? 

Mr. Ltddle. Yes; they worked pretty well last season. 

Mr. Jefferis. Are they affected by this seaman’s act the same as 
these passenger boats or not? 

Mr. Diddle. I do not believe they are. 

Mr. Jefferis. Do you know about it yourself, or is that just an 
opinion you have? 

Mr. Diddle. Oh, well, the seaman’s act, as I understand it, was 
practically confined more to the passenger service than to the large 
freighters, on account of the number of people that are carried on 
the passenger ships. 

I want to say one thing more; I want to call the attention of the 
committee to the time of service that some of the passenger boats on 
the Dakes are in commission. Some of them are onty in commission 
about 10 weeks; the balance of the time they are tied up to the docks. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. How long has that been the condition, Mr. 
Diddle? 

Mr. Diddle. Why, people going to the summer resorts, you know, 
go from about the 15th of June until the 1st of September. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That has been general throughout the last 10 
years, then? 

Mr. Diddle. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That has not come about by reason of the sea¬ 
man’s act, then, has it? 

Mr. Diddle. I won’t say that covers all the passenger boats. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. But the ones you refer to, that has been true for 
a good many years? 

Mr. Diddle. Some of the vessel owners here can probably explain 
that to you better than I can. 

I might say, Mr. Chairman, I have a copy of a telegram here from 
my home town, Wyandotte, Mich., dated April 30, addressed to Hon. 
William S. Greene, chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: 

Dear Sir: We heartily approve and fully indorse the amendment to sections 
2, 13, and 14 of the La Follette seaman’s law. It is a vital question to this dis¬ 
trict, particularly this city, on account of our shipping industry. We will ap¬ 
preciate your utmost support in the adoption of this amendment. 

Very truly, yours, 

James G. Kingston, 

Secretary-M anager. 

Mr. MacDean. Mr. Chairman, Mr. James E. Davidson, Bay City, 
has just come in. I do not know whether he is prepared to make a 
statement or not. Mr. Davidson is one of the representative ship¬ 
builders on the Great Dakes. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JAMES E. DAVIDSON, BAY CITY, MICH. 

Mr. Davidson. I want to state to the committee that I am not 
financially interested in the Detroit & Cleveland Steam Navigation 
Co. or in a company that owns the passenger steamers running from 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 107 

Cleveland to Buffalo or on any other route. We are primarily in¬ 
terested in Michigan, in seeing that the points on the Lake Huron 
coast receive passenger service. It is important for them to have 
this service for the reason that it enables our farmers and our manu¬ 
facturers on the Lakes to avail themselves of the lowest possible 
freight rates; also the lowest possible passenger rates. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Just a moment. I do not like to interrupt you, 
but will this gentleman be able to give us any light on the subject as 
to the operation of this seaman’s act, financially on this shipping, as 
well as the relief that is requested in this amendment? We are 
pretty well satisfied they need this freight service and passenger 
service and that it is important to the shipbuilders and all that. 
Will we get something different? 

Mr. Scott. I think he will give it all to you. He is a business man 
and does not waste words. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Does he know the financial condition of the 
companies asking for this relief; how much money they have made, 
how much they have lost, and how much additional expense this act 
adds to their operation? I think I voice the sentiment of the com¬ 
mittee in that question. 

Mr. Scott. We can not get it all in at one time. We have started 
on the shipbuilding end of it to show how their business has de¬ 
creased, and Mr. Davidson is entirely familiar with all the ship¬ 
builders on the Lakes. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Is he a shipbuilder himself? 

Mr. Scott. He is a shipbuilder himself and his father and his 
family for years before him. 

Mr. Davidson. I am vice president of the American Shipbuilding 
Co., and we built 209 vessels for the emergency fleet. 

Mr Free. What did you say was the name of your company? 

Mr. Davidson. The American Shipbuilding Co. 

Mr. Briggs. What size vessels were those? 

Mr. Davidson. The largest size to go through the Welland Canal 
is 261 feet at the keel and 43 feet 6 inches beam. 

Mr. Briggs. Of what tonnage? 

Mr. Davidson. The tonnage of those ships varied from 3,000 to 
4,000 gross tons. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you know where those ships are now in service? 

Mr. Davidson. They are down on the coast. 

Mr. Briggs. They are for sea service? 

Mr. Davidson. They are all down here on the (‘oast now. 

Mr. Briggs. They were built for sea service not for lake service ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes; they were built for the Emergency Fleet—for 
the Government. 

Mr Briggs. I understand, but not for operation on the Great 

Lakes ? . 

Mr. Davidson. No; not for operation on the Great Lakes Now, I 
am stating that as a preliminary to the matter that I also want to 
bring up. I am also interested in the smaller type of ships as owner, 
and while I feel that some aid should be given to the passenger lines 
to enable them to operate, vet at the same time I feel that some 
aid should be given to the smaller type of ships. I am interested 


108 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


particularly in wooden ships of the 3,000-ton type. In 1895, we will 
take a ship of the Sacramento type, 3,000 tons- 

Mr. Briggs. Steel or wood ? 

Mr. Scott. Wood. 

Mr. Davidson. In 1895 the Sacramento was built. The Sacra¬ 
mento at that time represented the modern ship, and we built about 
50 of those ships. In 1895, when that ship came out. and during the 
succeeding years up to 1908, the Sacramento was operated by a crew 
of 15 men. In 1920, the same ship, under the provisions of the La 
Toilette law, was required to carry a total number of crew of 23 
men, showing an increase of over 50 per cent. N ( ow, I have here the 
inspection certificate of the Sacramento from the period of 1908 and 
also the inspection certificate issued by the Government in 1920. 
The Sacramento , as I said, carries 3,000 tons. She is available for 
the general trade that is not called upon, and for which the larger 
ships could not be used. 

I also want to state that shipbuilding, as far as wooden ships are 
concerned, on the Great Lakes, is obsolete. No wooden ships are 
being built at this time and have not been built for the last 10 years. 
Steel has replaced wood and the larger ships at the present time are 
built of steel and they carry all the way from 9,000 up to 13.500 tons 
gross. And the matter in which I am primarily interested is the 
smaller type of vessel. I would like to ask your committee to con¬ 
sider the aid that you can offer us, so as to permit us to operate 
these ships. 

Mr. Jefferis. Why is it you can not operate? Has the competi¬ 
tion with the railroads something to do with it? 

Mr. Davidson. No ; not competition with the railroads. We operate 
them in out-of-the-way ports where large ships would not be avail¬ 
able, and we do not meet with the railroad competition. 

Mr.- Jefferis. You spoke of aid; what do you mean? 

Mr. Davidson. I mean by that, fixing the number of crew that 
we should carry aboard those ships, to modify your act, bearing in 
mind that the total number of crew to operate those ships was 15 
men, and 15 man had always operated them until the La Follette 
law went into effect, and now you compel a crew of 23. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. When this ship was commissioned it operated 
with 15 men ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Rosenbeoom. What business was she engaged in; freight and 
passenger, or just freight? 

Mr. Davidson. No passengers on these ships. These are common 
freighters. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And she was still a freighter when the require¬ 
ments for the crew were made 23 ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Free. What do the additional men do? 

Mr. Davidson. They do not do anything. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Can you give us the titles of the additional eight 
men? Are they freight handlers, watchers, or what? 

Mr. Davidson. For instance in 1908, there was a master and pilot, 
then two pilots, two engineers, three firemen, seven of the deck crew, 
making a total of 15. Under the present law, there is one master, 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 109 


one mate, one second mate, three wheelmen, one marksman, one chief 
engineer, one second engineer, two cooks, three oilers, three firemen, 
three coal passers, and three deck hands. 

Mr. Free. Mr. Davidson, how T many more hours per day would the 
15 men have to work than the men work now with 23 ? 

Mr. Davidson. Under the 15 crew there were 6-hour periods, 6 
hours on and 6 hours below. I think under this arrangement there 
are 3-hour periods. I might be corrected as to this. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. As a matter of fact, then, it has amounted to 
putting in effect an 8-hour day as against a former 12-hour day; is 
that correct? 

Mr. Davidson. I think that is correct. In other words they worked 
six hours at a time, six hours on and six hours off, and the other 
arrangement- 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Makes it an 8-hour day instead of a 12-hour day? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Free. Would they be on duty continuously or would they be 
in port any of the time ? 

Mr. Davidson. Those ships are in port a great deal of the time. 

Mr. Free. The wav it works out, how many hours a day would a 
man work where you had 15 men in the crew?' 

Mr. Davidson. They do not do any work in the port. 

Mr. Free. Flow much of the time are they in port? 

Mr. Davidson. Those boats are in port more than the big bulk 
freighters, because they have to handle cargoes that are not quick 
handling. For instance, last year and this year the Sacramento is 
loading pulp wood. It takes several days to load a cargo of pulp 
wood and unload. During that time the crew does not load or do 
anything. 

Mr. Jefferis. The crew does not load the pulp wood? 

Mr. Davidson. The creAv has nothing to do with handling cargo. 
That is all handled by stevedores and outside labor. 

Mr. Davis. In the ordinary traffic on the Lakes, under your sys¬ 
tem, about how many hours per week were those crews required to 
work ? 

Mr. Davidson. They would simply work—when I am talking 
about six hours on and six hours off I am talking about when the 
ship is in operation, not when she is in port. 

Mr. Davis. What would be the approximate average for the week 
of work hours for the crew? 

Mr. Davidson. I would not want to guess on that. I would have 
to have a little time to figure that out. And when they are in port 
the crew is not called upon to do anything except perhaps shifting. 
They might handle the lines and shifting at the dock, but outside of 
that they do nothing in regard to handling cargo. If he is a 
watchman, he would stand watch a while, and if he was a fireman 
he would fire the boilers, and' the coal passer would pass the coal, 
and the engineers would stand their watch. 

Mr. Scott. How long a run do you make? 

Mr. Davidson. The run with our boats is slow. It takes six or 
seven days to run down. The steel freighters—the large boats—make 
a little better time than that—a great deal better time. 



110 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Bankhead. As 1 .understand it, you want absolutely to restore 
the old system of operation, before the passage of the seamen’s act, 
affecting the number of the crew and the work hours? 

Mr. Davidson. No; that is not it. I want you to consider—I do 
not ask you to do just exactly what I would like to have you do, but 
1 would like to have you modify this act so that we can carry a less 
number of men. 

Mr. Bankhead. How many less? 

Mr. Davidson. 1 should say to put that up to a maximum of 18. 

Mr. Bankhead. What would those 3 additional men include: what 
men would they include that were not in the old 15-man crew? 

Mr. Davidson. For instance, you 1 might put in an oiler, say, with 
the engineers. 

Mr. Bankhead. That would only be one: that would make 16. 
What other two would you propose to put in? 

Mr. Davidson. The other two you might put in the deck crew. 

Mr. Bankhead. And restore the 12-hour system of labor ? 

Mr. Davidson. That would be the 12-hour system ; yes. Six on and 
six off. 

Mr. Free. What is the system on the Canadian boats? Do they 
have the 12 or the 8 hour system ? 

Mr. Davidson. I could not answer; I am not familiar with that. 

Mr. Davis. Have you any objection to the requirements in the 
seamen’s act in regard to living conditions. 

Mr. Davidson. No. 

Mr. Davis. As I understand, your sole objection as to the require¬ 
ments is to the number of the crew ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Do you not think it would be well to state to the com¬ 
mittee that the forward crew even now work six hours on and six 
hours off? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes; the forward crew even to-day work six hours 
on and six hours off. 

Mr. Davis. You mean under the present law? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; under the present law they work six on and six off. 

Mr. Davidson. Now, the most important thing, not only for the 
vessel interests, I want to direct your attention now, is the fact we 
must have some relief so that we can get service in northern Michigan. 
As I said before, I am not financially interested in these companies, 
but I am indirectly interested in the prosperity of northern Michigan. 

Mr. Scott. The committee would be glad to have any information 
regarding shipbuilding conditions around the Great Lakes, Mr. 
Davidson. 

Mr. Roseneloom. I imagine that report we are to get will cover 
that—showing the building there since 1910. 

Mr. Scott. That is only in one yard. 

Mr. Roseneloom. No; we have asked for it for the whole region. 

Mr. Scott. From the Marine Review. That will give it very com¬ 
pletely. 

Mr. Davidson. I have heard a question asked about the number of 
ships constructed since 1910. 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Davidson. I would state that that data can be obtained from 
the Bureau of Navigation right here in Washington. The shipbuild- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. Ill 


ing on the Lakes is dull; there are no new ships being built now of 
any kind in any yard. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. There are no cars being built, nor houses nor 
anything else right now. 

Mr. Davidson. Oh, there are houses being built. 

Mr. Davis. That condition regarding shipbuilding is prevalent 
throughout the world, is it not? 

Mr. Davidson. Not entirely. You will find there are ships being 
built, and houses being built, and other lines of industry going on. 
And I want to state this regarding the passenger business, that there 
have been no passenger boats built for some time, and if there could 
be some encouragement given I know in two or three instances where 
we could figure on getting new passenger tonnage to build, pro¬ 
viding the conditions warranted so that they could operate at a 
profit. 

Mr. Free. If the crew is reduced from 23 to 18, as you suggest, 
what difference in money would that make in the operation of your 
boats ? 

Mr. Davidson. That would make a difference of about $6,000 a 
season. 

Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Davidson, are there enough passenger boats 
in commission now on the Great Lakes to adequately and comfort¬ 
ably fill the requirements at the present time? 

Mr. Davidson. No; there are not. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Davidson, do you operate any other vessels than 
those of this one company you speak of—the Great Lakes Transit 
Corporation, or anything like that, are you interested in that? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. I am interested in the Great Lakes Transit 
Corporation. I forgot that. We operate three passenger ships in 
that corporation. 

Mr. Bankhead. How long have you been operating those passen¬ 
ger vessels? 

Mr. Davidson. Ever since the company has been formed. 

Mr. Bankhead. Have you operated them at a profit? 

Mr. Davidson. Except—yes; we operated them at a profit last 
year. 

Mr. Bankhead. Where do they operate? 

Mr. Davidson. They are the Octarara , the Tionesta, and th eJauvita. 
They make the long trips. They make the trip Buffalo to Duluth 
and back, for which they receive, of course, quite a large fee. 

Mr. Scott. That is a trip of 1,066 miles. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Is there anyone connected with the financial 
affairs of the company he refers to here as a witness? 

Mr. Scott. He is the company. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the length of service of the crews on those 
vessels. 

Mr. Davidson. I can not tell you that for the reason I am not con¬ 
nected with the operating department there. I have only been on 

that board for five months. i . _ „ ... . 

Mr. Briggs. Have any of the passenger ships been taken oil, within 

your knowledge, within the last five years? 

Mr Davtdson. I do not think there have, except notice has been 
sent out by the D. & C. that they would not operate this year. They 


112 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 1S > AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


sent out notice to the shippers they would not operate this year on 
the Lake Huron route. 

Mr. Briggs. What reason did they give? 

Mr. Davidson. On account of its being not profitable. 

Mr. Briggs. Did they designate in what respect it was unprofitable 
and why? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. As I understand it, they are cut down in re¬ 
gard to the number of passengers for a certain period, commencing 
early and also ending, I think, in September. The details, now, I 
really can not give you. I think there are some of the passenger 
men here who can give you that exactly, but I am not familiar with 
-that end of the passenger business. 

Mr. Hardy. That is really, then, on account of the shortness of 
the season? 

Mr. Davidson. The shortness of the season. 

Mr. Briggs. Does your company reach out for any of the Canadian 
business—the international business ? 

Mr. Davidson. Except occasionally, I do not think—you are speak¬ 
ing about passenger boats ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. 

Mr. Davidson. I do not think they do. I can not tell you as to 
that absolutely, because 1 have only been on the board for four or 
five months. 

Mr. Briggs. In the freight business, though, you are in the inter¬ 
national business? 

Mr. Davidson, Our freight business touches Ontario. 

Mr. Briggs. In, that operation have you been able to compete with 
the Canadian ships? 

Mr. Davidson. We have here recently, for the reason they have 
taken off quite a number of Canadian ships and sent them to the 
coast. 

Mr. Briggs. Why did they take those Canadian ships off, if you 
know? 

Mr. Davidson. Because they sold the boats down there during the 
war at a very large profit. 

Mr. Briggs. Are the Canadians building any other ships to re¬ 
place them. 

Mr. Davidson. Yes; a lot of them. 

Mr. Br.tggs. But your vessels original^ have been competing with 
the Canadian ships satisfactorily? 

Mr. Davidson. I could not say as to that. The Canadians are 
building a lot of ships now and the Americans are not building a 
lot of ships. They have special concessions there that we do not 
have. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean Government concessions. Are they sub¬ 
sidies ? 

Mr. Davidson. No; I do not think they are Government conces¬ 
sions, but they have certain privileges there. I can not go into the 
detail on that, because I am not entirely familiar with the Canadian 
situation; but I do know they are building a lot of Canadian ships. 

Mr. Briggs. How many ships in the freight service have you been 
operating in the last 10 years ? 

Mr. Davidson. You mean the Canadians? 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 113 


Mr. Briggs. No; in that Canadian business? 

Mr. Davidson. I should say, off and on an occasional trip, you un¬ 
derstand—I should say, three or four. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you kept that up at practically the same number 
during- the last 5 or 10 years, or has it changed—been reduced or in¬ 
creased ? 

Mr. Davidson. No; it is just as you get a cargo. For instance, if 
you get a cargo of grain at Fort William, you would send a boat to 
Fort William or Port Arthur, which is up in the vicinity of Duluth, 
or occasionally you get a load of Canadian pulp wood that goes to an 
American port. We can not take any cargoes from two Canadian 
ports. The Government restricts us. We can take a cargo from a 
Canadian port to an American port or from an American port to a 
Canadian port. We do not have the privilege of loading at Port 
Arthur and unloading at Port Colborne, or any other Canadian port. 
We simply can take from a Canadian port to an American port or 
from an American port to a Canadian port. So you understand 
under those conditions, the Canadians are greatly favored over us, 
because they can take from a Canadian port to a Canadian port and 
from a Canadian port to an American port. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, they have coastwise restrictions just 
as we have in our country ? 

Mr. Davidson. That is true. 

Mr. Briggs. AYu have no regular line of service between Canadian 
ports and American ports? It is’just what is known as tramp 
service? Whenever a business offers, a boat goes there and gets it? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. Under the conditions you have named, do you 
know whether or not the amount of Canadian tonnage has increased 
since we got into the war ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Bankhead. It has increased? 

Mr. Davidson. It has increased and is increasing. 

Mr. Bankhead. On what do you base that statement? 

Air. Davidson. I base that statement on the boats they are build¬ 
ing. 

Mr. Bankhead. Can you approximate the amount the freight ton¬ 
nage has increased since the war ? 

Mr. Davidson. I can not tell you that. 

Mr. Bankhead. I understood you to say you had three passenger 
vessels in the service—your company ? 

Mr. Davidson. That is, the Great Lakes Transit Co. He asked me 
about the Great Lakes Transit Co. 

Mr. Bankhead. You are interested in that company? 

Air. Davidson. AYs; I am. 

Mr. Bankhead. Have those ships been operated at a profit or a 
loss since the seaman’s act went into effect ? 

Mr. Davidson. I am quite sure they operated at a profit last year. 

Air. Bankhead. And for how many years before? 

Air. Davidson. I could not tell you, because I was not on the board. 

Mr. Bankhead. You hold stock in those companies, do you not? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

4S420—21-8 


114 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, IS, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Bankhead. You do not know whether they have paid any 
dividend on your stock or not ? 

Mr. Davidson. Not on that part. This company owns 19 freight¬ 
ers, and these are simply three-passenger boats mixed in with the 
others. 

Mr. Bankhead. Haven’t you made any inquiry since you owned 
that stock to learn whether those boats were operated at a profit or 
a loss? 

Mr. Davidson. I have only been on the board for four months. 

Mr. Bankhead. But you held stock in the company? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes; but the details of that I did not look into. 

Mr. Bankhead. You can not tell the committee whether those 
companies operated at a profit except last year? 

Mr. Davidson. I can get that information. I would be very glad 
to get that for you, if you desire me to do so. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it or not a fact that the great building program of 
the Government and the great amount of tonnage on hand is likely 
to leave the shipbuilding industry a little shy in the near future ? 

Mr. Davidson. That would not apply to the Great Lakes because 
that tonnage all went off the Lakes. 

Mr. Hardy. So that you have no surplus of tonnage on the Lakes 
now ? 

Mr. Davidson. There is a surplus of tonnage at the present time. 

Mr. Hardy. There is a surplus? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. From where does it come? 

Mr. Davidson. Why, it comes from the fact that there is a dull 
period, a dull season. For instance, the ore that will be brought 
down, in place of bringing down this year 20,000,000 tons—they won’t 
bring down this year, the steel corporation won’t move, over 8,000,000 
tons as against 20.000,000 last year. That is on account of the slump 
in building operations. 

Mr. Hardy. Do not the Steel Corporation have their own tonnage 
now ? 

Mr. Davidson. No. 

Mr. Hardy. Have they got any tonnage? 

Mr. Davidson. They have about 100 ships, yes; but it has been the 
policy of the Steel Corporation to carry a certain amount in their 
own ships, and also to allot to the independent lines a certain amount 
to carry. So that this year they will probably only fit out about 50 
per cent of their ships. 

Mr. Hardy. They have ships on hand and will only use about 50 
per cent? 

Mr. Davidson. Only about 50 per cent this year. 

Mr. Hardy. So that they at least have a surplus of 50 per cent ? 

Mr. Davidson. I presume—now, this is just conjecture on my part; 
it is not anything authoritative or anything they have told me; I am 
simply making a guess at that proposition. 

Mr. Hardy. Are your shipyards offering to build ships any cheaper 
than they built a year ago, or two years ago ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. They are now reducing the price of tonnage ? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 115 

Mr. Briggs. About what price per ton are they offering to build 
ships for now ? 

Mr. Davidson. The bulk freighter, per ton, I presume could be 
built at the present time on the Lakes—now, this is conjecture, be¬ 
cause it is a matter }mu would have to figure out according to the type 
of ship you want- 

Mr. Hardy. Take a freighter, say, of 4,000 tons, or 3,000 tons. 

Mr. Davidson. I presume a 3,000 or 4,000 ton ship at the present 
time could be built for around $80 a ton. 

Mr. Briggs. A gross ton or a dead-weight ton, or what? 

Mr. Davidson. That is, a carrying ton. 

Mr. Hardy. That is a new term. What does that mean ? What is 
a carrying ton? There is a net ton, a gross ton, and a dead-weight 
ton, but this is a new term. 

Mr. Davidson. A ship measured by the Government at 2,300 tons 
would actually carry about 3,000. 

Mr. Hardy. That is really the dead-weight ton, then, is it not? 

Mr. Davidson. No. A dead-weight ton would simply be what the 
ship carried; that is the dead weight. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you said that was the carrying. 

Mr. Davidson. A ship measured, for instance, for 3,000 tons’ ca¬ 
pacity would actually carry 3,500, and that 3,500 would be the dead 
weight and not the Government measure. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you said the carrying ton was not the same 
as the dead weight ? 

Mr. Davidson. That is it. 

Mr. Scott. The price you name for the construction of ships there 
is purely a Lake-type ship ? 

Mr. Davidson. Sure; that is a Lake-type ship. 

Mr. Briggs. I understand it is a Lake type. 

Mr. Scott. That is not an ocean-going ship. 

Mr. Davidson. That is for a Lake type. You take last year, the 
cost for these large ships was $100 a ton. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the cost of these steamers they call the Lake- 
type steamers, built for the Shipping Board, which are used now in 
the sea service ? 

Mr. Davidson. Those, I think, range around $720,000. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean per ton. 

Mr. DaVidson. I think that would be about $90 a ton. Now, this 
is conjecture. Our arrangement with the Shipping Board was a 
little different than that of anybody else, but we signed a contract 
with the Emergency Fleet Corporation—we took the contract at the 
price they fixed and then we wrote a letter to the Emergency Fleet 
Corporation and stated, when it was all done, in case the profit ex¬ 
ceeded 10 per cent that we would return to the Government the 
excess over 10 per cent. So that we returned to the Government a 
very large amount of money. It ran into the millions. So that the 
cost of the ships built for the Emergency Fleet by the American 
Shipbuilding Co. was less than the cost for which they got the ships 
from anybody else, considering the same type. 

Mr. Free. Was there any provision in case there should be a loss 
you would still get your 10 per cent? 

Mr. Davidson. In case there should be a loss, that was all the 
ships would cost the Government. That was purely voluntary on 


116 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


our part. They did not expect it, but we did not expect to profiteer 
on the Government. 

Mr. ITardy. I think you deserve commendation on that. 

Mr. Davidson. This can be verified. 

Mr. Edmonds. Your contract was made with the Government for 
somewhere around $180 a ton ? 

Mr. Davidson. I think so. 

Mr. Edmonds. That was not a Lake type boat ? 

Mr. Davidson. No; that was an ocean ship. But, understand, her 
cost was less. 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes; you gave something back to the Government 
afterwards. I do not know what it amounted to. 

Mr. Davidson. And we made the best record and got out all of 
our boats, and got them out quickly, too. 

Mr. Edmonds. But you did not mean $90 a ton for that type of 
ship ? 

Mr. Davidson. No; I meant $190. 

Mr. Hardy. It will be a matter of interest to the committee if you 
will put in the record a statement of the price you contracted for 
and how much you did turn back. 

Mr. Davidson. I would be very glad to do that. 

Mr. Edmonds. And the tonnage you built. 

Mr. Davidson. I would be very glad to do that. 

Mr. Gaen T he ocean tonnage is more expensive? 

Mr. Scott. The ocean tonnage is very much more expensive. 

Air. Briggs. How much tonnage have you built since the war. for 
service on the Great Lakes; how many ships? 

Mr. Davidson. Four. 

Mr. Briggs. Freighters or passenger ships? 

Mr. Davidson. All bulk freighters. 

Mr. Briggs. How many ships had you built prior to that time, 
within the preceding five years, for service on the Lakes? 

Mr. Davidson. I could not give you that from memory; I would 
have to look that up. But if you would like to have me do it»I would 
be very glad to get the information for you. 

Mr. Briggs. I wish you would, and designate the years you refer 
to as the Avar period; I mean Avhether it Avas at the outbreak of the 
European war or the date of our entrance into the Avar. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did your company sell any A r essels to the Emer¬ 
gency Fleet Corporation that Avere built before the Avar? 

Mr. Daatdson. No. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did you sell any vessels to them straight out that 
the company oAvned ? 

Mr. Davidson. No. The company sold no boats on their OAvn 
account. It Avas straight contract. I would say this, that the com¬ 
pany contracted with the Cunard for some ships that were afterwards 
commandeered by the Government, but it Avas a contract they took 
OAnr for the Cunard people. 

Mr. Bankhead. And your company made no profit on that trans¬ 
action ? 

Mr. Davidson. No profit whatever. 

Mr. Jefferis. I would like to go back to these three passenger 
vessels you spoke of. The distance from Buffalo to Duluth is what? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 117 


Mr. Davidson. About 1,000 miles. 

Mr. Jefferis. What time does it take those vessels to make that 
trip? 

Sir. Davidson. I can not tell you. 

Mr. Jefferis. You do not know how many days ? 

Mr. Davidson. No; I do not. They stop at Cleveland; they stop 
at Detroit. I do not know whether they stop at Mackinaw or not. 

Mr. Jefferis. Does this seamen’s act affect vessels that make long 
trips the same as it does vessels that make short trips or not? 

Sir. Davidson. In the passenger business I can not tell you. I 
really am not familiar with that part of it. 

Mr. Jefferis. This is the longest trip on the Lakes, from Buffalo 
to Duluth, is it? 

Mr. Davidson. The reason for that is because the fare is a great 
deal more than it is on these shorter routes. 

Mr. Jefferis. It is a greater distance also, is it not? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. But you do not know how the law affects long trips 
as compared with the short ones ? 

Mr. Davidson. I can not tell you that. 

Mr. Edmonds. It is a four and a half day trip. 

Mr. Davis. During what period of the year do those vessels operate ? 

Mr. Davidson. I think it is 60 days. It may vary a little. I am just 
giving you what is a conjecture. It can not be much longer; it may 
be 75 days, but it is during the period, I think the principal work, of 
July and August. They may operate a part of June. 

Mr. Davis. And are they tied up during the remainder of the year ? 

Mr. Davidson. They are laid up; yes. 

Mr. Davis, Do the provisions of the seaman’s act in regard to life¬ 
saving equipment affect the operations of those three vessels? 

Mr. Davidson. I should think it would to some extent, but the 
amount I can not tell you. 

Mr. Scott. They operate during the summer season ? 

Mr. Davis. That period is 90 days ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; it is right in the middle of the summer, and really 
comes under the same provisions of the law as the other ships do. 
It does not really affect them at all. These ships are operated in 
conjunction with a very large fleet of freight ships, also as a side 
issue. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Davidson, do you know, or happen to know, how 
many freighters were idle on the Great Lakes since 1915, during the 
usual season? 

Mr. Davidson. In 1915? 

Mr. Scott. No; since 1915. 

Mr. Davidson. No; I can not tell you that. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you give us any idea, approximately ? 

Mr. Davidson. I should judge that the boats were pretty active 
during all of that time, and I should think that the number laid up 
would be very small. That is a matter, without looking it up and 
getting some data, that I could not give you, except what would be 
my opinion. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the condition on the Great Lakes prior to 
1915 with respect to the number of vessels that were laid up during 
the season ? 


118 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Davidson. It was bad. There were a lot of boats laid up dur¬ 
ing that period and the freights were very low. Lots of ships were 
sold and lots of ships had to be refinanced. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean prior to 1915? 

Mr. Davidson. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the actual condition to-day upon the Great 
Lakes ? 

Mr. Davidson. The actual conditions—we can not get much of a 
line on it at the present time. The ore rate has not been fixed. I 
doubt if the coal rate has been fixed. There has been some moved, 
but the rates, what the boats are going to get, lnive not been decided. 
There have been some cargoes of grain moved at a very low rate, 
which have been moved at a loss. 

Mr. Hardy. All rates are low at the present time—both the sea 
rates and the foreign rates as well. 

Mr. Davidson. All except the railroad rates. 

Mr. Hardy I mean the water rates. 

Mr. Davidson. The water rates on the ocean, I think, are lower. 
But you take the railroad rates they are nearly double what they 
used to be—passenger rates and freight rates. Some of the rates of 
the railroads are 117 per cent higher. 

Mr. Hardy. I know the railroad rates are extremely high. I am 
speaking about the water rates. 

Mr. Davidson. The water rates on the Great Lakes, so far as 1 
know, have not yet been established. Some cargoes have been car¬ 
ried, but the amount they will receive has not yet been determined. 

Mr. Scott. It has not opened up yet. 

Mr. Jefferis. Does the Interstate Commerce Commission have 
anything to do with the rates on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Scott. No; except where they operate between two cities, but 
they do not where they are entirely engaged in the coastwise trade 
between points in the same State. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, you 
have been very patient—more patient than I thought you would be— 
in listening to the representatives from the boards of commerce. Our 
program is practically through. Mr. L. E. Williams, representing 
the Great Lakes Sand & Gravel Association, I will ask you to hear 
now. Mr. Williams is from Detroit. 

STATEMENT OF ME. L. E. WILLIAMS, MARINE MANAGER OF THE 
UNITED FUEL & SUPPLY CO., DETROIT. 

Mr. Williams. I am marine manager of the United Fuel & Supply 
Co., of Detroit, Mich., and on the executive committee of the Great 
Lakes Sand & Gravel Producers’ Association. That is an organiza¬ 
tion which takes in the majority—not all, but the majority—of the 
marine producers of sand and gravel on the entire chain of the Great 
Lakes. We have a membership from Charlotte or Rochester, N. Y., 
through to Chicago. At my own port, Detroit, a little better than 
two-thirds of the producers are actual members of this association. 
It is a sort of a get-together proposition; and incidentally, for the 
information of some of my labor friends who may be worried about 
this thing, our association is no way treats with labor. We have 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 119 

nothing to do with the labor end of it; we are simply an association 
for looking into matters like this—concerning legislation, for in¬ 
stance—and the fields of production, inspection matters, class of mate- 
rails, and the requirements of contractors, engineers, and things of that 
nature. It is more or less of a semitechnical idea, but incidentally 
we operate a few ships of a small type. There are between 20 and 30 
companies which are actual members, and probably 10 companies or 
so on the Lakes are not. 

We have between 40 and 50 ships. Our plant investment is approxi¬ 
mately $5,000,000, and our plant output annually at the market 
prices will run from three to four million dollars. We employ be¬ 
tween seven and eight hundred men. By that I mean on the boats, 
and work strictly in connection with the marine end of it. 

Of course, the majority of our member companies, aside from this, 
are building supply dealers—not all of them, but a large portion of 
them—and this act and the proposed amendment hits us from a some¬ 
what different angle than anything you have heard before. Our runs 
in general are from—some of them—an hour and a half up, and will 
average, say, four or five hours. 

Mr. Jefferis. You mean the runs of these ships? 

Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. Of course, we have some ships on runs of 
six and eight hours, but that is very exceptional. For instance, at 
Rochester—I believe this ship was cited before; a little bit of a boat— 
I have a little note that the owner of that ship sent me. She is 
116 feet long, 27-foot beam, with a rated capacity of 230 tons gross. 
She is not much of a boat. That boat was a Canadian bottom, but all 
during the war he could not get hold of anything else. These boats 
are of a special type and hard to get, and unless they take and build 
one there are not any of them available. They are specialized in the 
trade. The owner bought this boat over in Canada. At that time the 
regulations or the law prohibited him from transferring it to the 
American flag, but in view of the fact he had actually purchased the 
boat and she became American property financially the Government 
gave her American coastwise permit during the war. The Canadians 
extended that privilege to us and we to them under a great many 
special conditions during the w T ar, and under those conditions she came 
over and operated out of Rochester. 

He goes on to say here that her run is about 3J miles from our 
dock, and at no point is she over three-quarters of a mile off shore; 
that the total time consumed in the round trip is never in excess 
of four and a half hours. During the war she carried, I think, 
a crew of seven men: but when the war was over and the smoke 
had all cleared away they immediately told him, “ No more coastwise, 
but we will transfer your ship to the American flag,” which they pro¬ 
ceeded to do, and she is now an American bottom, or was a month ago. 
Immediately she became an American bottom the inspection service 
made him put on tw r o more firemen. He now carries on that boat 
three firemen for a run of three and a half hours. He goes out at 
9 or 10 o’clock in the morning and comes back in the middle of the 
afternoon. Notwithstanding that fact, he carries three firemen. His 
costs—this is my own estimate, based on what the costs are; it is 
purely an estimate, but pretty close—his labor under the old system 
would be about $875 a month and under the new system it is now 


120 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

about $1,125, or an increase of 30 per cent in his labor cost. And that 
does not include a possible increase in his forward crew. 1 do not 
know and he does not know just where he is going to land; he has 
not started, but he does know he has to carry 8 firemen, and he was 
also made to put on a 15-man lifeboat to take the place of the boat for 
7 required in Canada. It looked suspicious to him- 

Mr. Hardy. How many round trips does he make a clay? 

Mr. Williams. He has made two: but, generally speaking, he only 
makes one. Then it takes the rest of the afternoon for the dock crew 
to unload the cargo. He pumps the cargo on by the hydraulic 
method, but he unloads it with the clam-shell outfit, which is consid¬ 
erably slower. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you know how much he earns a month? 

Mr. Williams. No; I do not know. 

Mr. Bankhead. You do not know, then, whether he operates at a 
profit or a loss. 

Mr. Edmonds, Does he unload with liis own power ? 

Mr. Williams. Oh, no; he has to unload with power on shore, a 
derrick on shore—what we call a clam-shell outfit. 

Mr. Edmonds. He is required to keep three shifts of firemen in 
order to keep steam up at the dock, I suppose ? 

Mr. Williams. The boys all go home at night. 

Mr. Edmonds, Does he tie up at night ? 

Mr. Williams. He banks the fires and after that there is not a 
darn thing done. 

Mr. Edmonds. Virtually, he only has use for one fireman all the 
time ? 

Mr. Williams. He would have no use for two of them: virtually, 
you can not see w T hat they are doing. The last time I heard from him 
he had not operated under these new conditions. Whether he has 
started out under these conditions yet or not, I do not know, but that 
is what the Government inspectors told him he would have to do. 

Mr. Hardy. Where are these Government inspectors; at Detroit ? 

Mr. Williams. Oh, no. I do not know whether they are the 
Rochester inspectors, whether they have local inspectors there, or 
send the inspectors over from Buffalo. I think they send the in¬ 
spectors over from Buffalo, but I am not sure about that. 

Mr. Hardy. Can you give the names of the inspectors that made 
those requirements in this particular case? 

Mr. Williams. I can not, but you can get them from the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce. They can teil you absolutely the men who made 
the inspection of the boat at the port of Charlotte. 

Mr. Hardy. I would like to know about that. 

Mr. Williams. The law says an}" boat which navigates under the 
seamen’s law, and they have construed that to mean a boat navigat¬ 
ing at any place on the Great Lakes, excepting on the rivers and in 
the harbors, must carry three watches. That is what we are trying to 
get away from. 

Along that same line, going into some of the other boats at San¬ 
dusky, they make one trip per day. I suppose boats have made two 
trips; I do not know; but as a general proposition they make one. 
Their run out of Sandusky is from four to five hours out and back,, 
sometimes six. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 121 


Mr. Hardy. The round trip? 

Mr. Williams. Yes, sir; out to load and back to port. And they 
carry three firemen. They have the same proposition; the boats 
come in and tie up at night. We have the same proposition at To¬ 
ledo. At Erie they used to get sand in the harbor and either the 
quality or the quantity played out and finally they had to go outside 
the lines of the harbor. There is a long peninsula that sticks out into 
the harbor at Erie, and they had been working on the inner side, and 
then they had to go around the peninsula and work on the outside. 
The inspectors can not help themselves; if they go outside the harbor, 
the law says they shall carry three watches in the after end. 

There is not a single thing about how long they navigate. Whac 
we are after is some relief on the short runs. On those runs they do 
not have to fire more than six hours. In the past, before the seaman’s 
law went into effect, they have always given us a permit to operate 
12 hours with a single crew. They still do that on the rivers. In 
my own case I can operate at Detroit on the rivers for 12 hours, or 
not to exceed 13 hours the law reads. On the St. Clair River and 
Lake St. Clair I could, if I would like to, work 12 hours, but I do not 
do it, because I would have to double the crew. But I could do it, 
because my papers allow it. But the minute I go below Bar Point 
or above Port Huron on the St. Clair River, even if I only go a 
thousand feet outside of the piers, I have laid myself open to the 
seaman’s law and have to put on three crews. 

Mr. Cullen. The inspectors have no discretion ? 

Mr. Williams. Absolutely no; they have no discretion in that mat¬ 
ter at all. But I will say for some reason that the inspectors have 
rather stiffened up the requirements in a great many cases. I can not 
see just where the law tells them to. They have done it on my boats, 
boats on the same run—on some of the boats they have required this 
three-watch system in the after end, because it is up to the inspectors 
to determine the kind of boat and what crew a ship shall carry. 

Mr. Cullen. According to her tonnage? 

Mr. Williams. No; it is not only tonnage. For instance, I have 
boats in my fleet of a certain tonnage which carry a larger crew than 
boats of a larger tonnage. It is not altogether tonnage. 

Mr. Cullen. They regulate it according to the style of the boat ? 

Mr. Williams. Yes. 

Mr. Cullen. But on the regular ocean-going freighters the ton¬ 
nage would intervene ? 

Mr. Williams. In a general way, yes. 

Mr. Hardy. It is up to them to say what crew shall be required. 

Mr. Williams. It is up to them to regulate the crew; whatever 
they think is necessary. As I say, in our case, we have boats which 
have operated for years with a single crew and all of a sudden they 
have been increased one or two men. We are not arguing about that. 
Of course, it is a hardship; there is no question about that; it in¬ 
creases the cost of the personnel. But it is the specific requirements 
of the law. We will take our chance with clean-cut inspectors under 
the previous law; but the Government has told them to go and do 
thus and so. or Congress, and it works out on a boat that goes out and 
turns around and comes back again, practically speaking, because 
the pump does the loading very rapidly. Those boats on our fleet 


122 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

run about as large as any of them; we have one over a thousand tons 
but the majority of them run from 500 to 1,000 tons gross register, 
and in our fleet we have three steel boats and seven wooden boats. 
Two of them do not come under inspection; two of them are barges; 
but aside from the barges we have five wooden boats and three steel 
boats running from 300 or 400 up to 900 or 1,000 tons, gross. 

Mr. Bankhead. Are your boats all busy at the present time ? 

Mr. Williams. No, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. What percentage of them are laid up ? 

Mr. Williams. In tonnage, about 90 per cent of them are operat¬ 
ing, as far as capacity goes. I hope to get the others going, too; but 
at Detroit we have, at the present moment, a pretty fair demand. 

Mr. Bankhead. You are operating 90 per cent at the present time, 
at a profit or a loss? 

Mr. Williams. We are operating at a profit; otherwise we would 
not be operating. But the reason we are operating at a profit is 
this, we have simply tacked the cost onto the consumer. 

Mr. Scott. In other words the excess amount of employees you 
carry on your ship, that you do not need at all necessarily increases 
the cost of building material which you furnish to the poor man who 
is trying to build a home. 

Mr. Williams. Absolutely. 

Mr. Scott. And he has to pay it in order that you can operate at 
a profit ? 

Mr. Williams. And in line with that proposition—I do not know 
how familiar you gentlemen are with sand and gravel and what hap¬ 
pens to it, but we brought into Detroit alone (I am reading now a 
couple of extracts from a report which we made in an argument be¬ 
fore the United States Government enginer at Detroit there), in 1917 
we brought into the Detroit market alone, by boat, 1,827,000 tons of 
sand and gravel. That was about 70 per cent of what was brought 
in. There was about 30 per cent brought in from pits. At a great 
many of the Lake cities. Detroit among others, the pits that are avail¬ 
able for the supply of sand and gravel lie at a point where the rail 
freight rate puts them pretty nearly out of the running. They use 
them for some special kinds of work; but, generally speaking, the 
boats can bring the sand in cheaper than the rail can, even under 
existing conditions. That material is used for all sorts of concrete 
construction, road building, sewers, water supply, and things of one 
kind and another, and for building houses. And remember a man 
can not build any house but what he has to use some sand. Even 
for the little w^ooden house with a little foundation under it (that is, 
up in our country at any rate), you have to have a foundation and 
that foundation requires sand; and in the fire limits it takes conshler- 
able sand to put up a house. And Detroit has been very shy of 
housing accommodations. 

Mr. Lazaro. You said a moment ago that the increased cost of 
operation under the law is passed on to the consumer? 

Mr. Williams, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Lazaro. How much is the increased cost of operation under 
this law, about? 

Mr. Williams. In a rough way—of course, it varies with the boat, 
but taking the general average, the labor is approximately 30 per 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 123 

rent of the total cost of operation. When I say total cost of opera¬ 
tion, I am including the overhead, depreciation, interest on invest¬ 
ment in other words, all the costs which a full-fledged going busi¬ 
es would put in. I am not talking about operating costs. 

Mr. Lazaro. I am talking about the increased cost of operation 
under the present law, which you are complaining about. 

Mr. TV illiams. I will get at that in just a second. Your labor cost 
of the ship under the old regime was approximately one-third, in 
round numbers. It varies in some places; in some places it runs 
lower and in a few it runs higher. But take the case of a man at 
Rochester, which is a fair sample, I would say 30 per cent. 

Mr. Lazaro. I am not talking about the increase in wages and 
salaries; I am talking about the increase of the number of men you 
have to employ now under the new law; because we know wages have 
gone up all the time. 

Mr. Williams, I am talking about the change in the number of 
men. Take the case right here of this little boat I spoke about; his 
costs were $875, with the same wage, with the original crew. Under 
the law he had to put on two extra men, which raised his cost, with 
the same wage, to $1,125, an increase of 30 per cent, due to the two 
additional men. 

Mr. Chindblom. And not due at all to an increase in wages ? 

Mr. Williams. Not due at all to an increase in wages. That is 30 
per cent, or, in round figures, 10 per cent of the cost of production 
was the increase in his case, due to the putting on of these additional 
men. 

Mr. Chindblom. And in passing that to the consumer- 

Mr. Williams. In passing that to the consumer, which means the 
ultimate consumer, he is paying 10 per cent more for his material. 

Mr. Chindblom (continuing). Is he paying just that much addi¬ 
tional or more ? 

Mr. Williams. I could not say; it varies. But I will guarantee 
it costs that much more. It has been pretty hard to make out any 
fair schedule on building costs during the recent war or during 
the war period, even up to last year, because the things are chaotic 
and the prices shot up and down and sideways and you could not 
come to any logical conclusion except as based on cost. 

Mr. Bankhead. Your argument is, if I understand it, that the law 
for a certain number of men now required, if it be amended, it will 
result to the benefit of the consumer of sand and gravel ? 

Mr. Williams. I will say yes; absolutely. Up at Detroit, as well 
as everywhere else, there is very sharp competition. Take Detroit 
alone; there are 28 or 30 boats in this trade under about 15 different 
ownerships, and there is absolutely no connection between those 
ownerships. Many of them are being operated by the men who own 
the boats, and they work as the masters of the boats. 

Mr. Bankhead. Your interests would logically seem to be for the 
protection of the consumer of these products and not of the owner of 
the ships? 

Mr. Williams. Absolutely. 

Mr. Bankhead. You are able to operate at a profit now under 
existing conditions, because you can pass the increased cost on to 
the consumer ? 



124 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Williams. Absolutely; the point being we would not operate 
if we were not making a profit. And we have been reluctantly m the 
position where we were compelled to raise our freight rates and the 
ultimate consumer is the one who suffers. And we can not see why 
the building trades and the road commissions—take the big road¬ 
building program which the Government is at work on and which 
it is trying to work out with the State road commissions—why, those 
men should be penalized for the benefit of the men on board ship. 

Mr. Scott. At the present time, in view of the high cost of every¬ 
thing—labor, material, and everything else—incident to the con¬ 
struction of buildings, the only way it might interest you is in the 
building program of the country and at Detroit being curtailed ? 

Mr. Williams. That is correct. 

Mr. Scott. ^Now, when they curtail that business and cut it down' 
it affects you, does it not? 

Mr. Williams. That is correct; there is no question about that. 

Mr. Hardy. You say your labor cost, under the old regime, was 
about 30 per cent of the total cost of operating? 

Mr. Williams. Approximately. That varies from ship to ship, but 
in a general way; yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Does that labor cost, which you say is 30 per cent of 
the operating cost- 

Mr. Williams. No; not operating cost; 30 per cent of the entire 
ship's cost, which means overhead and all. 

Mr. Hardy. It is 30 per cent of the total cost to you of a year’s 
operation ? 

Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And that includes everything? 

Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Does that 30 per cent in labor include the cost of load¬ 
ing and unloading, which is separate from the cost of your crews? 
As I understand it, when you get to the harbor, the creAvs do not 
unload ? 

Mr. Williams. There is a different condition on about half of the 
ships. About half of the ships in my fleet, or a little less than half, 
are the so-called pump boats or sand suckers, with hydraulic rigs. 
They load themseh-es, but they do not unload. Aside from that Ave 
have some boats that do unload themselves, but they are unloaded by 
shore creAvs, generally speaking. 

Mr. Hardy. Does that 30 per cent of the cost of labor for operating 
include the cost of labor AvhereA^er it is employed ? 

Mr. Williams. It includes no shore labor whatever. That cost is 
based entirely on the ship’s pay roll absolutely. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that shore labor added into your OA r erhead? 

Mr. Williams. It is not added in at all, because we delh T er on the 
dock or alongside the dock. Whoever takes that stuff has to handle 
that end of it for unloading, or AA r e give them an unloading price.. 

Mr. Hardy. Your ships do the unloading? 

Mr. Williams. On the derrick boat, yes; not on the pump boat. 

Mr. Hardy. So that this 30 per cent includes the cost of labor for 
unloading? 

Mr. Williams. It does not in the pump boats. 

Mr. Hardy. It includes all the cost you have for labor? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 125 


Mr. Williams. In the ship’s pay roll; yes. For the labor we 
employ ashore it does not take in that. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you employ labor ashore ? 

Mr. Williams. We employ in our company probably $50,000 or 
$60,000 a month ashore. That has nothing to do with the steamboat 
end of it though. 

Mr. Hardy. That is not a part of this 30 per cent? 

Mr. Williams. No. sir: it is not connected with tlie steamboats in 
any way. 

Mr. Cullen. Do all of your boats you are operating come under the 
provisions of the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Williams. Not all I am operating; no, sir. 

Mr. Cullen. How many of them do not ? 

Mr. Williams. It depends on how they are operated. Our gravel • 
beds lie partly in the St. Clair River and partly out in Lake Huron 
and Lake Erie. When we operate ships out in Lake Huron and 
Lake Erie they come under the seamen’s law. 

Mr. Cullen. Two-thirds of your fleet—does that come under the 
provisions of the act? 

Mr. Williams. Yes; two thirds of them are crewed under the pro¬ 
visions of the act in my particular fleet. And these other fellows, 
outside of our local at Detroit there, the men at Rochester, San¬ 
dusky, Cleveland and Toledo and those ports, and Chicago, they all 
come under the seaman’s act, because they have absolutely no material 
available inside of the harbor lines. 

Mr. Free. Tell us just what you are asking us to do for you. 

Mr. Williams. The point we are interested in is the paragraph per¬ 
mitting us to operate with two watches up to 16 hours and leaving 
it absolutely wide open to the inspectors, which I presume would 
mean a single crew under 8 hours. That is what we want. What 
we are trying to get away from is three crews in the after end 
when we work not to exceed 16 hours. 

Mr. Edmonds. What does the crew do when you tie up; what do 
the firemen do? You have to have two extra firemen on that boat. 
What do they do when you tie up ? 

Mr. Williams. They usually go up town somewhere. What they 
-do up town I do not know; I do not go up there with them. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do you pay them when they go up town? 

Mr. Williams. You bet your bottom dollar you pay them. 

Mr. Edmonds. And they do not do anything for it? 

Mr. Williams. There is nothing they do. 

Mr. Edmonds. They don’t bank the fires? 

Mr. Williams. Some fellow may stay around and look after the 
fires if he don’t have the money to go up town. 

Mr. Edmonds. You don't carry novels on board for them to read, 
do you? 

Mr. Williams. No; but I have lent them dice on board sometimes. 

One point that has been touched upon was this matter of what is 
or should be the safe period on the Great Lakes. We have some dope 
on that which to me looks authoritative. That is the insurance. Our 
fleet is all insured, and most of the Lake boats are. It is carried 
principally through the American bureau, and in my own case a 
great deal* of it is carried in London, through Lloyds. They are the 


126 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

people whose means for making a livelihood depends on the safety of 
ships. They are betting money against you that the ship is going to 
be safe, and they pay you if it is not. They are gambling their entire 
hope of financial welfare on whether your ship will come in safe or 
not, and they ought to know what they are betting on. They say 
from the 1st day of April to the 5th day of December your ship is 
safe; if it is not, they are going to pay you for it. After the 5th day 
of December I can run my steel boats, but not my wooden ones, ex¬ 
cept by paying a special premium. Again, we can start out earlier in 
the spring by paying a special premium. But the one rate applies 
from the 1st day of April up to the 5th of December. 

Mr. Chindblom. Don’t you get a better rate if you change the 
season ? 

Mr. Williams. No, sir; there is no change in rates from the 1st 
of April to the 5th day of December, except if a boat is tied up 
they will rebate to you. But the actual rate per thousand of insur¬ 
ance is the same, and it only changes after December 5 and previous 
to April 1. 

Mr. Davis. Does that apply to all the chain of Lakes? 

Mr. Williams. As far as I know, it does. I know some of my 
boats are licensed in the policy for the chain of Lakes, and I can 
run under that license on all the Lakes if I want to, because I do 
not see why they would give me something if they did not intend I 
should use it. And I believe that is the fact. 

Mr. Scott. It is universal. 

Mr. Williams. Another point I want to make: In comparing the 
rail with the water rates there was some criticism made on this mat¬ 
ter of terminals. Somebody said, “Well, the terminals at Detroit 
are worn out; they are inadequate.” I do not want to agree with 
that. There was quite an article written in the Engineering Record 
some two years ago—I can not recall all the details—making com¬ 
parisons of water and rail transportation, in which they went very 
carefully into this matter of terminals. Generally speaking, the 
trouble with inland water transportation is the terminals—there is 
no question about that—but in this article it was very specifically 
conceded that there on the Great Lakes the terminal facilities were 
better than any place in the world. There is no place in the world 
where they can handle coal with the rapidity we can on the Great 
Lakes. 

But in comparing the rail and water rates you have to allow for 
cartage to the ships, because we do not have rails and sidings to the 
very back door of your plant. In the case of the railroad, you order 
a freight car in at Toledo and Detroit; that freight car comes on 
to your siding, and you fill it up, and then it is moved out and is 
carried through to destination. But in the case of water transporta¬ 
tion you have to load your freight onto the dock; you can not go up 
the street somewhere near your plant, right at your back door, and 
load onto the boat. And for that reason, in comparing rail and 
water rates, you must take into consideration the matter of cartage, 
because unless you have your plant right next to the river front you 
have to cart every ounce of freight onto the dock and you have to 
add that to the water rate. And it is only by taking that into con¬ 
sideration that you can draw any fair conclusions. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 127 

Mr. Edmonds. They might say the Detroit terminal is now inade¬ 
quate, because they are contemplating putting big improvements 
there ? 

Mr. Wiijaams. Yes. In the case of transatlantic shipments; and 
if we ever get into the transatlantic—as we hope to some day—we 
will have enormous, big cargoes. But as long as we have the present 
package freight we now handle it is a little different thing. Our 
friends, the D. & C., have just got through building a dock in the 
last year or two which is conceded one of the finest there is anywhere 
for handling that particular type of freight. 

Mr. Edmonds. Where is that, Cleveland ? 

Mr. Williams. Detroit, too. 

Mr. Chindblom. Are the other big cities on the Great Lakes just as 
well equipped? 

Mr. Williams. I would say so. Not only that, but the Government 
has spent and is spending millions of dollars for harbor improve¬ 
ments on the Great Lakes so that we can utilize them, and then they 
want us to go to work and put the rates up to compete with the rail¬ 
road rates and not get the benefit of that improvement if w 7 e come up 
to the rail rates and get up around there. If we can go below the rail 
rates and do not do it, the Government is not getting a return back to 
the shipper, for whom the money is spent in this improvement. 

Mr. Edmonds. Are your local rates supervised ? 

Mr. Williams. I could not say as to that. 

Mr. Chindblom. Who did you say was trying to induce you to raise 
rates ? 

Mr. Williams. I do not say anybody is trying to, but the question 
has been brought up here why we don’t raise our rates up to the rail 
rates. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me interrupt you there. My suggestion was that 
the water rates ought to be low enough to beat the rail rates; and if 
you had to come nearly up to the rail rates to make it pay, they would 
still beat them. 

Mr. Williams. The point is this : If you make that comparison 
you must take into consideration the cost of trucking to and from 
these docks. 

Mr. Hardy. Those terminal charges are a very essential element, I 
understand ? 

Mr. Williams. There is no terminal charge involved in the Lake 
traffic that I know of, in the package freight. 

Mr. Hardy. I mean the terminal cost to get it to and from your 
docks ? 

Mr. Williams. Your trucking charge. 

Mr. Hardy. Or getting it to and from the railroad box car ? 

Mr. Williams. Correct. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, is it not a fact that nobody, except the large 
wholesalers, have the railroads, running right up to their backdoor 
on sidings? 

Mr. Williams. No; it is a fact in Detroit. I can not give you the 
exact figures, but I would say, offhand, that 90 per cent of the people 
who receive material in volume sufficient to warrant car shipments, 
have their own sidings. 

Mr. Hardy. Ninety per cent of the people who receive carloads 
from the railroads have sidings running up to their back doors ? 


128 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Williams. Yes; those who load carloads have their own sid¬ 
ings—at least 90 per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. What proportion is package freight? Is that any con¬ 
siderable portion of the carload freight? 

Mr. Williams. Package freight goes in box cars, and if you have 
enough package freight to fill up a box car that is all you need. 

Mr. Hardy. But package freight does not go to the back door of 
the man to whom it is shipped ? 

Mr. Williams.. Yes; I have seen full trainloads of package freight 
go onto one siding. It is bulk freight, you see. The distinction of 
package freight is in the manner of handling your commodity. 

Mr. Hardy. What I am trying to get at is for a matter of informa¬ 
tion. I want to know what percentage of package freight goes to 
the back door of the man to whom it is shipped ? 

Mr. Williams. That I could not say. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know whether a large proportion of it has to 
be handled by drayage? 

Mr. Williams. I would not want to make a guess. Always with 
us, in the case of wholesalers, a great deal of it is handled by car. 
The retailer is different. 

Mr. Hardy. But on the question of competition with water trans¬ 
portation, if there is a great portion of the freight that has to be 
carried into the box car by drayage, even when carried by the rail¬ 
road, as to that there would be no advantage to the railroad ? 

Mr. Williams. Only this: That, generally speaking, in large cities, 
the railroads have team tracks scattered all over town, and if you 
have a shipment to make on the railroad you can probably find, in 
nine cases out of ten, that you can get a team track not far from your 
plant. 

Mr. Hardy. In the case of water transportation you have that, too, 
don’t you? 

Mr. Williams. How are the shippers going to get out on a team 
track on the water? You do not have streets on the water. They 
have to stop at the dock. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean a railroad track? 

Mr. Williams. Yes; a railroad track, where you can load and un¬ 
load. That is just a track on which they deliver, which the railroads 
put in for public convenience. 

Mr. Hardy. It is a siding? 

Mr. Williams. It is a siding for the benefit of the general public; 
it is not controlled by any one shipper. 

Mr. Davis. It is a railroad sidetrack? 

Mr. Williams. Yes. 

Mr. Cullen. Where your vessel comes into dock you can discharge 
your vessel out of the hold of the vessel into the car, can you not ? 

Mr. Williams. Into the car; yes, sir. 

Mr. Cullen. You draw your car right up against the side of the 
ship ? 

Mr. Williams. If there is a transfer to the rail. 

Mr. Cullen. Yes. 

Mr. Williams. In other words, if there is any transfer to the rail¬ 
road, it is a direct transfer. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 129 


Mr. Cullen. There is no question but that increasing the freights, 
bringing the water freights up to the rail freights—if you did that, 
you would have no business again? 

Mr. Williams. No. 

Mr. Hardy. What 1 am insisting on is that he can haul by water 
very much cheaper than he can by rail, but that does not take into 
consideration these terminal charges. 

Mr. Chindblom. In all events, there must be an extra handling 
when freight is carried by water. Even if it is put into the car at the 
wharf that car has to be carried to the siding? 

Mr. Williams. You mean where it is carried to a ship ? 

Mr. Chindblom. In the case of the ship there is always one extra 
handling ? 

Mr. Williams. Yes. On package freight you might say that is the 
invariable rule. i 

Mr. Gahn. But there is an advantage in shipping by water? 

Mr. Williams. There is an advantage to this extent, that in going 
from Cleveland to Detroit you might take 10 days to two weeks to 
go by rail, on account of the delay in getting through the yards. 
You can do it in seven hours and a half by water. 

Mr. Scott. Now, gentlemen, we have endeavored to present the sit¬ 
uation to show the conditions in a general way throughout the Great 
Lakes section. I presume there are some men on the committee 
who do not appreciate the fact that the run from Buffalo to Duluth 
is 1,066 miles. A round trip is equivalent to an ocean trip. So that 
when you take what we call a long voyage on the Great Lakes it is 
fairly comparable with an ocean trip. And, as Mr. Davidson stated, 
there are only a very few passenger boats that engage in that long 
haul of 1,000 miles. The great majority of our ships on the Great 
Lakes operate on short hauls. I presume it would be a safe state¬ 
ment to say that the average run of a passenger ship on the Great 
Lakes is less than 16 hours, and there are many of the ships—hun¬ 
dreds of them—with runs of less than 8 hours. You take particu¬ 
larly the ships running from the mainland to the various islands, for 
instance, the mainland at the north end of the State and running 
over to Mackinaw Islands. There are thousands and thousands of 
people carried over there during the summer time. The distance is 
3 miles from the north mainland and 6 miles from the south main¬ 
land. It takes approximately 30 minutes to go over from the lower 
peninsula and 15 minutes to go over from the upper peninsula. 

Mr. Free. How long does it take a boat to go from Buffalo to Toledo 
on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Scott. From Buffalo to Toledo would take from 9 to 10 hours. 
You are speaking of passenger ships? 

Mr. Free. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Passenger ships leave Buffalo at 10 o’clock at night, 
and they are in Toledo the next morning at 3 o’clock. 

Mr. Cullen. The run to Duluth—what is that? 

Mr. Scott. The run to Duluth on the fast ships would take four 
days. Of course, you understand that is not consumed entirely in 
running. The ships stop at Cleveland, Detroit, Mackinaw Island, 
Sault Ste. Marie, and after they leave Sault Ste. Marie there are no 
other stops until they reach Duluth. 

48420—21-9 


130 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Cullen. Yes; I have made the trip. 

Mr. Scott. They discharge freight and take on and put off pas¬ 
sengers. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Does what you say apply to freight as well as 
passenger ships? 

Mr. Scott. No. 

The D. & C. people, who are mentioned here quite frequently, have 
the largest passenger fleet on the Great Lakes, and they have had for 
the last 25 or 50 years. I do not know how many ships they have. 
They must have 10 ships—passenger ships. How many ships have 
you, Captain ? 

Capt. Simpson. Eight passenger ships. 

Mr. Scott. You have had more than eight, because you had two 
running out of Bay City- 

Capt. Simpson. We only ha,ve eight now. 

Mr. Scott. These passenger ships are virtually the only passenger 
ships we have on Lake Huron, and the Goodrich Line—you will hear 
from them on Lake Michigan. 

Mr. Cullen. In regard to Bay City, when did they quit running 
into Bay City? 

Mr. Scott. They quit running into Bay City about four or five 
years ago. 

Capt. Simpson. About 1913,1 imagine. 

Mr. Cullen. Was there any real reason for stopping that trip? 

Capt. Simpson. It was not profitable. 

Mr. Cullen. They were not making any money ? 

Capt. Simpson. No. 

STATEMENT OF ME. H. W. TTIOEP, PRESIDENT AND GENERAL 
MANAGER GOODRICH TRANSIT CO., CHICAGO, ILL. 

Mr. Thorp. I am president and general manager of the Goodrich 
Transit Co., at Chicago; 38 years in the business—38 years with the 
company. 

Mr. Cilindbloom. Incidentally, you have not done much else, have 
you? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; I worked before that. I want to clear up two 
things in relation to rates and to say something about the kind of boats 
we operate. There have been some—not exactly misstatements, but 
things have not been exactly clear. There are more than two boats 
on the Lakes that are strictly in the passenger business. There are 
some on Lake Michigan, and we operate one strictly passenger steamer 
ourselves. We operate six, all told, but we are in the passenger busi¬ 
ness exclusively and in the passenger and freight business combined. 
We have a boat that we run in the passenger business wholly and 
absolutely. 

In relation to rates, I hope you do not get confused—Mr. Hardy 
especially—on this low cost of handling freight on the Great Lakes. 
That applies entirely to the bulk freighter, which has no overhead. 
They go to the ore docks and get their ore. And, gentlemen, they load 
some of those 12,000-ton boats in less than an hour. You may not 
know that. They load them in less than an hour and take them out 
in three to four and five hours. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2. 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 131 

Now, the sort of boats most of us here are interested in are the 
combination freight and passenger boats. We handle package freight 
altogether—not the bulk freight. The cost of handling as compared 
with the rail—you have the wrong idea. Even Mr. Williams did not 
clear that up. To begin with, a shipper, in shipping carload lots, even 
if he ships by rail, usually has a sidetrack at his place of business, or 
what we have spoken of before as a team track. The railroad does 
not at any time touch that freight. The shipper loads that freight on 
his car at his place of business on the team track, and the consignee at 
the other end either unloads at his sidetrack or at the team track. 
The railroad simply hauls that freight; they do not touch it. The 
steamboat line—when we come to the freight dock with a load of 
freight, that freight comes to the dock in a wagon; we have to take 
it from the wagon and put it on the floor of the warehouse, take it 
from the floor of the worehouse and put it in the boat, and then, at the 
other end, we have to take it from the boat to the warehouse and from 
the warehouse to destination. We handle that freight four times. 
We can not compete in our costs with the railroads. 

Now, our own company for several years back, Mr. Hardy, has 
been charging rail rates. As a matter of fact, for two years, between 
Chicago and Milwaukee, we have had a premium on the business. 
That is no longer in e'ffect now. We have just, in the last couple of 
days, increased our rates to the rail rates. It is the dispatch you give 
them. They wanted their freight and were willing to pay a premium 
to get it. 

Mr. Briggs. In referring now to the rail rates, you are referring to 
express freight? 

Mr. Thorp. The so-called package freight, as we term it. And I 
quite agree with Mr. Williams that raising the rates to get money 
enough to pay the men aboard the boats, the ones we have no use for, 
puts a burden on the people. That is a fact, and that is what is being 
done wherever you have that, and that is what is done wherever you 
try to do it. 

Mr. Briggs. In this connection I wish, for the benefit of your argu¬ 
ment, you would make a little more clear the size of the boats you 
are operating, the size of the crews, and how many men you have on 
there which you say are surplus and unnecessary. 

Mr. Thorp. I want to tell my story in just a little different way. 
The teeth of this bill for us—it is a labor-union measure from start 
to finish. 

Mr. Jefferis. Which one? 

Mr. Thorp. The old bill; from start to finish. I was in the gallery 
of the Senate when this bill was passed. We tried to get Sir. La 
Follette’s ear and we could not get it. We were told he did not want 
anything to do with us. It was not long afterwards Mr. La Toilette 
said “ Mr. Furuseth is the savior of the American merchant marine. 
That was after the bill was passed. And to-day lie is running a 
strike against the Government; that is what he is doing. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not understand this committee ever failed to 
hear your committee of shipowners and ship operators ? 

Mr. Thorp. No; I do not; but I want to read something that oc¬ 
curred before your committee as to the labor-union proposition. 

Mr. Scott. Now, Mr. Thorp- 

Mr. Thorp. I would like to get this into the record. 


i.32 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. I do not blame you at all. But there are a lot of new 
members on the committee. The older members of the committee are 
entirely conversant with that feature of it, but I think the new mem¬ 
bers would be much more interested in the number of ships you are 
operating, the number }mu have been obliged to lay up. the number 
of ships in the hands of receivers, and the amount of loss you sus¬ 
tained in the last two years on account of this law, and why this law 
is making it unprofitable and impossible for the combination freight 
and passenger ships to operate on the Great Lakes to the great detri¬ 
ment of the people of the State of Michigan. 

Mr. Gahn. And of Ohio, too. 

Mr. Thorp. I will bring some of those points out, but they are not 
all in the bill. 

Mr. Scott. I am willing to put them in. 

Mr. Thorp. I want to read you a circular that was gotten out after 
the hearings in December, 1915. 

Mr. Hardy. A circular gotten out by whom ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. By the Associated Passenger Lines of Lake Michigan; 
and this is a copy of a part of the hearings before the Merchant Ma¬ 
rine and Fisheries Committee in 1913. I am just going to read you 
an extract. 

Mr. Hardy. Lay off of the circular and read the extract of the hear¬ 
ing, if it was testimony before this committee. 

Mr. Thorp. It is not necessary to read the whole of what I have 
here, but this is an exact reproduction of page 189 in the official 
United States Government record of 1913 of the hearing held before 
the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of 
Bepresentatives, on Senate bill 136. 

Mr. Hardy. That is all right- 

Mr. Thorp. I think perhaps you were present. I was present at 
the time, and I think you were also, Judge. 

Mr. Hardy. I am sure I was. 

Mr. Thorp (reading) : 

Mr. Manahan. Mr. Chairman, my associate suggests that I am not advised 
as to the methods of cross-examination, and suggests I do not know possibly 
what I am talking about. I am just as weary as the other gentleman is and 
just as anxious to get through, because I have much to do; but one of the big 
questions underlying this, in my opinion, apart from the question of safety 
to the public, is the proposition to get such a law as will compel these steam¬ 
ship companies to part with more of their money for the seamen who do the 
work. It is a labor-union law. I will have the gentleman understand it. It 
is the law of labor unions only for the benefit of labor. 

Now, Mr. Manahan, if you recollect, pretty nearly run the meeting. 
He was a member of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, 
a Congressman from Minnesota, and he represented Mr. La Follette 
at this hearing. 

Mr. Hardy. You saw enough of Mr. Manahan to remember that 
he was an extreme member on this committee on that bill? 

Mr. Thorp. I do. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you remember when that was? 

Mr. Thorp. In 1913. 

Mr. LIardy. And the bill passed when ? 

Mr. Thorp. It passed in 1914 and became effective March 4, 1915. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Manahan was not even on the committee at that 
time, was he? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 133 

Mr. Thorp. He was at all of the hearings. 

Mr. Hardy. No; he never was at a hearing after he went off of 
the committee. 

Mr. Edmonds. He was on the committee in 1913, Judge. 

Mr. Hardy. I think you will find he left before that. 

Mr. Edmonds. No; because I think we were having hearings all 
during those two years. Of course, the completion of the bill may 
have come on later, but we were having hearings at that time. The 
first hearing, after I came on this committee, was on safety appli¬ 
ances. 

Mr. Hardy. I think you will find Mr. Manahan was not here at 
the time the bill passed. 

Mr. Chindblom. Was S. 136 the La Follette seaman’s bill? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I think I ought to insert right here that the bill as 
passed was more the work of Judge Alexander and of this commit¬ 
tee than the work of Mr. La Follette—90 per cent of it was the work 
of this committee. 

Mr. Thorp. As I have said, the teeth of this bill do not show in the 
bill itself. It is not the men altogether that you have to put aboard 
those boats. Before the bill became effective we dealt with two 
labor unions. Now, we have five on every one of our boats—five 
labor unions to do business with. And this is what happens: If you 
have any sort of a disturbance with one of them the other one takes 
that up. We have had a boat lying at our docks ready to leave with 
a load of passengers and fully loaded with freight and there Avas 
some difficulty about the cooks. We could ha\^e replaced the cooks. 
The firemen stepped out on the dock and would not take the boat 
out. We must have firemen; we must have a given number of them. 
Our inspection certificate says Ave must. We had to go back and 
pay those men and straighten up everything they wanted. And as 
they came back aboard the boat, the firemen said: “ Didn’t Ave fix it 
for you? Didn’t Ave fix it for you?” 

Mr. Hardy. It means, then, you object to certain requirements, be¬ 
cause the unions avail themselves of those requirements to make terms 
Avith you? 

Mr. Thorp. They have taken advantage of them from the day the 
bill Avas put into effect, and I will show you Iioav they have done it. 

Mr. Gahn. Why couldn’t they have done the same thing even 
before the bill Avent into effect ? 

Mr. Thorp. Because Ave have to have men iioav to complete the 
creAvs which we did not have to have before. We haA T e to have able 
seamen, which Ave did not have to have before. And that is one of the 
things we are asking in this amendment to be able to use certified 
lifeboat men in place of able seamen. 

Mr. Gahn. Couldn’t they have done this before the bill ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. Why couldn’t they have helped each other in the Avay 
you mention before the bill Avent into effect ? 

Mr. Thorp. There were only two unions, but afterwards they all 
immediately became unionized and affiliated. 

Mr. LIardy. Do I understand you want this amendment passed to 
help you fight the labor unions a*little more advantageously? 


134 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; I do not; but I want to tell you the things 
that happened after this was done. 

Mr. Edmonds. Before the La Follette bill you were an open shop 
and now you are a closed shop ? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. 

Mr. Gahn. I wish you would tell us how the bill has made you a 
closed shop. 

Mr. Thorp. Because, as I told you, we must have now a three-watch 
system in the fireroom. Last year, when we came to make our 
arrangements for 1920 with the seamen and the seamen’s organiza¬ 
tion, we were forced by the seamen to put in a three-watch system, 
just the same as the firemen had, because we could not get the fire¬ 
men—the firemen would not sign up until we did. And the law does 
not say that, gentlemen; we do not have to carry three watches in 
the forward end of the boat, but we are doing it now, simply because 
they told us they would not sign up unless we did it. That is what 
happened. 

Mr. Davis. If the three watches are not required by the seaman’s 
act, in what way does the seaman’s act permit the unions to take that 
position ? 

Mr. Thorp. We were unable to sign up with the other unions where 
it does require the three-watch system, because they were hand in 
hand, and they would not sign up until the three-watch system was 
put into effect in the forward end of the boat. That is what hap¬ 
pened. 

I want to tell you what happens under certain conditions. We had 
a steamer ashore a year ago in February, just north of Chicago. The 
boat had up steam; the boilers were working the entire time. She 
was ashore for three or four days. The firemen worked watch and 
watch; that is, the three-watch system. They were getting $125 a 
month. And during the time the boat was ashore they did the firing 
of the boilers to furnish steam to the steam pump, to get that boat 
out of trouble. When we got into port and wanted to take the boat 
out after we had had her repaired, the firemen would not take that 
boat out until we paid them $1.25 an hour for the time they fired to 
furnish that steam, although we paid them for the time they worked ; 
paid them their wages. We could not get other men to replace those 
men because the other men on the boat said, “ We do not go out unless 
the firemen get their money.” That is all absolutely true, gentlemen. 

Mr. Edmonds. What was their reason for asking the additional 
$1.25 a hour? 

Mr. Thorp. The only excuse they had was that they furnished the 
steam to the pumps to pump the water out of the hold of that boat in¬ 
stead of furnishing it to propel the boat. But they were getting the 
same pay as they would have been if the boat had been running and 
they had to stand the same watches as if the boat had been running. 

Mr. Davis. Is that action on their part justified by any provision 
of the seaman’s act ? 

Mr. Thorp. No; but I am telling you since the seaman’s act has 
come into effect it has put us into the power of the unions so that they 
make us jump through the hoop every damn time they get a chance. ~ 

Mr. Davis. In that connection, during the past six years, we will 
say, is it not a fact that the conduct of the unions in that regard has 
become general? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 135 

Mr. Thorp. I only know about those connected with steamboating, 
and I know enough about them. 

Mr. Hardy. You certainly know something of the general condi¬ 
tion? 

Mr. Thorp. No; I don’t, because I confine my efforts to steam- 
boating. 

Mr. Hardy. Don’t you read the newspapers ? 

Mr. Davis. I am not taking issue with you on that point at all, Mr. 
Thorp, but what I am trying to differentiate is this: I want to know 
in what way the seaman’s act has encouraged or permitted this coup¬ 
ling of the unions to which you refer ? 

Mr. Thorp. I tried to make that clear at the start, that the act re¬ 
quires us to carry men that we did not carry before. 

Mr. Davis. I understand that part of it. 

Mr. Thorp. And the larger number of men, and the fact that these 
unions discovered that we had to have a greater number of a certain 
kind of men, just as soon as they did that the trouble commenced. 

Mr. Davis. You have complied with the law in that respect, have 
you not, as to the number of men, anyway ? 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Scott. If you will permit me: Before the law went into effect— 
the La Follette seaman’s act—on the Great Lakes we employed men 
in consequence of their ability to run a ship. Now, since the law has 
been in effect we employ in consequence of their having an A. B. cer¬ 
tificate from the seamen’s union. 

Mr. Davis. In other words, is that the manner in which. it is deter¬ 
mined as to whether he is an able-bodied seaman or not? 

Mr. Thorp. I will read you the law on that before I get through. 

Mr. Hardy. Is there a provision in this law that requires a man to 
have a certificate from the seamen’s union ? 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, no. 

Mr. Hardy. That is what Mr. Scott says. 

Mr. Thorp. He is wrong about that. 

Mr. Scott. But they all belong to them; it is the same thing. 

Mr. Davis. That is a regulation of the union and not of the law. 

Mr. Scott. No. Before the law went into effect you could put on 
certificated lifeboat men. You were not required, under the law pre¬ 
viously, to carry able seamen? 

Mr/ Thorp. Onlv certificated lifeboat men. 

Mr. Hardy. Before the law went into effect you were not required 
to employ men who knew anything? 

Mr. Scott. No ; all you had to do was to find men who knew enough 
to run the ship, and we did that for 50 years before the law went on 
the statute books. 

Mr. Hardy. I think there is a whole lot to be said on that ques¬ 
tion. whether the boat owners should be the sole judges or whether 
they shall employ men who have been given some kind of a certificate. 

Mr. Thorp. There are certain affiliations since the seamen’s act 
went into effect that require us to employ them and to give them 
practically two months each year, regardless of whether they work or 

not. . t i ! o 

Mr. Jefferis. You say that is required in the law ? 

Mr Thorp No, sir; it is not required in the law; but the organi- 
zations are affiliated and they say, “ We won’t sign up another 


136 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

organization will say, “ We won’t sign up ”—unless the other organi¬ 
zation gets what they are after. 

Mr. Edmonds, The natural result of this was that after the sea¬ 
men’s act was passed, if you employed a man who had an able sea¬ 
man’s certificate from the inspectors the other men would not work 
with him unless he belonged to the union ? 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, absolutely they would not. 

Mr. Edmonds. If you went out in a certain district and got a man 
there who had been an able seaman maybe 10 years ago and had a 
certificate and you wanted to employ him, the union would not allow 
him to come on your boat unless he joined the union? 

Mr. Thorp. I would not say that ever happened to our company, 
but I say we agree to employ nobody but members of the union. And 
they make us do that. 

Mr. Edmonds. How about your cooks; were your cooks members 
of the union, too ? 

Mr. Thorp. They had just been organized at that time and we did 
not know it. 

Mr. Davis. What amendment to the La Follette seamen’s act would 
enable you to obviate that situation, even granting it is desirable? 

Mr. Thorp. I will read you the amendments. 

Mr. Hardy. Would any amendment in the bill proposed force the 
seamen to abandon their union and to work? 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, no. 

Mr. Hardy. Or force them to work in open shop or do anything 
if they did not want to ? 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, absolutely not, 

Mr. Edmonds. You might put an amendment in that no man should 
be given an able seaman’s certificate if he belonged to a union. 

Mr. Thorp. I will read you now some of the amendments. 

The amendment to section 2: The substitution of a two-watch sys¬ 
tem for the three-watch system on runs of less than 16 hours cer¬ 
tainly does not create a hardship. It simply goes back to what was 
the custom for years before the act was passed. The three-watch 
system does not in any way increase safety at sea. I have some 
figures here showing how long men work on certain runs of ours that 
I will be very glad to tell you about. 

Mr. Hardy. You are discussing the reasons for the bill now. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. Section 3: The provision with relation to 
certificated lifeboat men we believe makes for safety at sea, for 
the reason that to become a certificated lifeboat man applicant must 
stand an examination as to qualifications, etc., which is very rigid. 
To obtain an able seamen’s certificate all that is necessary is to be 19 
years old and make affidavit that applicant has had at least three 
years’ service on deck at sea or on the Great Lakes. Once an able 
seaman always an able seaman. There is no limitation as to time. A 
seaman a day after receiving able-seaman certificate may take em¬ 
ployment ashore and not put a foot aboard a ship for 25 years or more 
and still be able to serve as an able seaman without examination of 
any kind either as to physical fitness or as to ability. Now, that is 
your law; you can not get away from it. 

Mr. Hardy. You are complaining the law is not onerous enough. 

Mr. Thorp. What I claim is that that man who has stood an ex¬ 
amination and is a certificated lifeboat man is just as good to handle 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 137 

a lifeboat and in many cases a little better than the able seaman who 
takes no examination at all. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the certificated lifeboat man have to have a cer¬ 
tificate as of recent date? 

Mr. Thorp. No ; but he takes an examination that an able seaman 
does not take. 

Mr. Hardy. But having taken it once, his certificate is good al¬ 
ways ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. But the unions did not like that when we 
started in, because we took those men from any department, and 
they did not like to see us take them from a department over which 
they did not have control. 

Mr. Hardy. What is your objection to the able seamen’s law? 

Mr. Thorp. I am giving you now why I think the amendment 
would take care of the situation, just as well or better than the old 
law does. 

Section 4: The extension of the season, May 15- 

Mr. Davis. Before you leave that: As I understand, your second 
proposed amendment is to permit the use of a larger number of cer¬ 
tificated lifeboat men? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Davis. What percentage do you suggest? 

Mr. Tiiorp. The amendment does not call for any per cent. I have 
not the bill in front of me but the amendment calls for relieving this 
necessity, or something to that effect. 

Mr. Davis. In other words, in that respect you indorse the provi¬ 
sions embodied in Mr. Scott’s bill? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. 

Mr. Scott. Of course, you understand this only applies to the 
Great Lakes. 

Mr. Thorp. We are only talking for the Great Lakes. The exten¬ 
sion of the season May 15 to September 15 to May 1 to October 15. 
we believe to be a reasonable request. Certainly a steamer certifi¬ 
cated for a certain passenger allowance, May 15 to September 15, 
must be equally as safe with the same allowance and equipment 
May 1 to May 15, or September 15 to October 15. The increase of 
the offshore distance, where it is now 3 miles, to 10 miles simply puts 
the limit back where it was before the present law became effective. 
Not once since the law became effective has an occasion arisen on the 
Great Lakes where the 3-mile limit would have made for any greater 
safety than the requested 10-mile limit. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Scott, was that the provision in the bill we all 
agreed on? 

Mr. Scott. Yes: that is the provision that the committee unani¬ 
mously reported last year. 

Mr. Davis. We unanimously reported a bill out that passed the 
House, according those particular dates. 

Mr. Thorp. I recall that; but it did not become a law and we are 
now asking for it in the amendments we are asking at this time. 

Sections 5 and 6. Referring to the size of rafts and certificated 
lifeboat men, the amendments increase safety rather than diminish it. 
It appears in more than one amendment, in sections 5 and 6. The 
same reasons apply as to certificated lifeboat men in sections 5 and 6. 


138 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Davis. In that connection, is there any difference in the wages 
received by certificated lifeboat men and able-bodied seamen? 

Mr. Thorp. The certificated lifeboat man may be taken from any 
department. He may be a higher paid or a lower paid man than the 
able seaman. Our masters hold the lifeboat men’s certificate, and 
our engineers. 

Mr. Hardy. The able seaman has to serve before the mast or on 
deck for a certain time, while the certificated man may come from the 
cook’s department. 

Mr. Thorp. He does not have to, but it simply says he may. 

Mr. Hardy. I am talking about the law. The lifeboat man can 
come from the cook’s department or anywhere else. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; or the engineers, too. 

Mr. Hardy. Providing he has a certificate ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. The Secretary of Commerce issues the certificate, 
does he not ? 

Mr. Thorp. No; certain people are designated to issue those certifi¬ 
cates under the Department of Commerce. 

Mr. Chindblom. That is what I mean; it is under the Secretary of 
Commerce. 

Mr. Thorp. The Coast Guard does it irt some cases and the in¬ 
spectors do it in others. 

Mr. Scott. This particular section you are referring to now, sec¬ 
tion 5, relates entirely in the La Follette Act to the handling of life¬ 
boats and life rafts? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; I think so. 

Mr. Jefferis. Are those certificated lifeboat men unionized, too? 

Mr. Thorp. They are; yes, sir. 

Mr. Jefferis. Does that come in one of the five unions ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. I want to say this, that in one of our unions 
the men come and go and we have to take men and do take them with 
the approval of the union on a week’s probation. We can have them 
a week before they have to join the union, to see whether they are 
going to stay or not. That is our present arrangement with the 
union. They are on probation, in other words, for one week. 

Mr. Jefferis. What particular union is that? 

Mr. Thorp. Stewards and cooks. 

(The committee thereupon took a recess until 2.30 o’clock p. m.) 
after recess. 

The committee reassembled at 2.30 o’clock p. m., pursuant to the 
taking of recess. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I was going to ask the witness one question that 
might clear up something in my mind. Mr. Thorp, before the sea¬ 
men’s bill, we will say a boat of a certain kind had to carry 15 men. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. What was to prevent all or any considerable 
number of those 15 men striking, becoming unionized and holding 
you up, or enforcing their demands just as easily before you added 
the additional 3 or 4 men as afterwards ? 

Mr. Thorp. The act strengthened the unions to the extent that we 
could not get anybody but union men. We got men in the unions 


AMENDING SECTIONS 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 139 

that were not in before when we were able to go out in the open 
market, and we did run an open shop largely. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Then it is not the provision adding the addi¬ 
tional men which you are objecting to so much as the requirement- 

Mr. Thorp. The few dollars cost for those few men is a small por¬ 
tion of our troubles. It is because of the fact, as I told you this 
morning, of the many things that happened to us that were only able 
to be put over because of the fact that we were operating under a 
five-union control. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. It is the requirement as to the character of the 
men rather than the number? 

Mr. Thorp. Tes, sir. There has been too much stress placed on 
the number of men. It is what those men do to us when they* get 
us in their power. That is what hurts us. That is what has made all 
the trouble for us. 

^ Mr. Davis. Do not most of the transportation companies on the 
Great Lakes run on the closed-shop basis? 

Mr. Thorp. They have to do it on the passenger boat lines; yes, 
sir; but on the freight boat lines, no. There is an organization up 
on the Great Lakes known as the Lake Carriers’ Association that has 
absolutely an open shop, and the unions have never been able to 
touch them in any way, shape, or manner. They will tell you that 
they have, but they have not. They may have union men aboard 
their boats, but they are not recognized, nor do they do any business 
with any union at all, and one company alone owns 98 ships, and the 
bulk freight of the Great Lakes is carried in open-shop steamers. 
The freight boat lines have kept these unions like that. They could 
tie our tails when they could not tie the other fellow’s. 

Mr. Davis. What are the conditions that have made the situation 
in that respect different with the passenger lines from what they 
are on the freight lines? 

Mr. Thorp. I will tell you. For one thing, the freight lines were 
very large and powerful and organized financially and otherwise. 
They could anticipate the unions, and they have always given a better 
scale of wages and better conditions than the unions could ever give 
them. They have anticipated the union men by paying more than 
the union scale, for one thing, and they were able to do it in this 
way: This one organization has 98 ships. I do not suppose there 
is in that company one ship that carries less than 4,000 or 5,000 tons 
and up to 14,000 or 15,000 tons. We have to file our rates with the 
Interstate Commerce Commission, and also with the Shipping Board. 
They did not get this in right this morning. Some of these people 
are not entirely posted as to who governs on rates. Mr. Scott made 
a wrong statement this morning. With the Interstate Commerce 
Commission we file rates on joint through rates with the railroads. 
The Interstate Commerce Commission has no jurisdiction over our 
port-to-port traffic, although we do file our rates with them, both 
freight and passenger, but we have to file with the Shipping Board 
to-day, and they have full jurisdiction over our port-to-port traffic 
and the rates governing that traffic. 

Mr. Davis. Has the Shipping Board undertaken to regulate those 

rates ? 

Mr. Thorp. Begulate the rates? 


140 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Davis. Yes; when von have reported to them, have they re¬ 
quired any reduction or suggested any increase? 

Mr. Thorp. They have allowed practically the increases allowed 
the railroads by the Interstate Commerce Commission, but our origi¬ 
nal tariffs filed with the Shipping Board were about, I would say, 
exactly the same as they existed under the Interstate Commerce Com¬ 
mission before the board had control. But the Shipping Board has 
no control over interstate rates; that is a joint through rate for rail 
and water. The port-to-port traffic, whether it is from State to State 
or not, is not under the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com¬ 
mission, but the Shipping Board. 

Mr. Edmunds. That is Avhat I was trying to say. 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. 

Mr. Davis. Does this particular open-shop company you speak of 
pay higher or lower wages than the union companies? 

Mr. Thorp. They usually anticipate the unions and pay higher 
wages. 

Mr. Davis. Are they doing that to-day? 

Mr. Thorp. They have not given out their scale of wages for 
this year, and they are not operating yet. It is a little early. 

Mr. Davis. They do not pay higher wages than the union wage? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. But allow me to say this, that the minute 
they make their scale of wages—and the unions usually wait until 
they have made it—they are camping on our doorstep the next 
morning saying, “ This is your wage scale.” That has happened 
more than once. And I Avant to tell you this, that they have even 
made it retroacth T e with us, coming in the day after the wages went 
into effect and telling our men that they need not come to our office— 
“ Your wages are so-and-so: they are such-and-such a day.” I will 
take an oath that that is a fact. 

Mr. Edmonds, This large shipowner is, of course, a steam com¬ 
pany? 

Mr. Thorp. That is the particular one that I refer to; but there 
are many other lines. There is the Hudson Steamship Line, the 
Maple Fleet, and a lot more that are in the same organization of 
Lake carriers. 

Mr. Edmonds. But they do not carry the kind of material that you 
do; they carry truck cargo stuff? 

Mr. Thorp. That is what I say. I started out to say this- 

Mr. Edmonds. They do not have the competition that you do? 

Mr. Thorp. They do not file rates at all. They have no competi¬ 
tion in general classes; and if they pay a wage that is higher than the 
union scale or any scale they see fit to pay, they would raise their rates 
enough to absorb that: but Avhen it is figured on a ton of manufac¬ 
tured steel, you do not need to notice it at all. 

Mr. Scott. But all those ships of which you are speaking ha\ T e the 
long haul, and haul from the upper peninsula or Lake Superior? 

Mr. Thorp. Some of them, and some from Ashland down to Lake 
Erie ports—most of them from Lake Superior to Lake Erie ports. 
The increased cost of operating that ship does not mean anything in 
the case of a ton of manufactured steel, or hardly anything, and they 
can afford to do it, and they do do it: and that is the way they have 
been beating the unions that I am talking about noAv, absolutely. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 141 

Mr. Edmonds. But you have got competition to meet on your line? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; we have got to file our rates, and they have 
got to be approved, and we have got to file them in advance, and we 
never know then that we are going to be able to get them. We have 
got to file notice that we are going to file with the board. 

There is one thing that I did not tell you this morning, and I want 
to state that the Goodrich Transit Co. has been in business over 60 
years, and we operate the year round. We do not stop at all, except 
when the weather is very bad and the ice conditions stop us, and that 
does not always occur. We attempt to operate 365 days of the year, 
and during this last winter, this winter last past, we had a boat either 
going or coming between Chicago and Milwaukee every night except 
Sunday night, and we had some across the lake to Grand Haven and 
Muskegon. We operate now two boats during the winter months, 
and Ave used to operate four up until two years ago, but we found 
that Ave could not make it pay, and it did not pay. We have curtailed 
our service during the summer months and we have abandoned some 
service altogether. 

Mr. Briggs. Why can you not make it pay ? 

Mr. Thorp. Because the revenues deri\ T ed from the operation of 
those ships are not sufficient to pay the running expenses. 

Mr. Briggs. Was it because of the cost of operation or was it be¬ 
cause of a lack of cargo during this period ? 

Mr. Thorp. We haA r e had all the cargo Ave could take care of as a 
general thing. The revenue from that cargo did not pay the cost of 
operating. Some years ago we used to have Avhat was known as a 
winter scale of wages, and the supply and demand was what Ave 
figured on, and we could- 

Mr. Briggs. What are your operating costs? Just give the com¬ 
mittee a statement as to what the operating costs of your vessels are 
and the number of men you have now and what you used to operate 
Avith. 

Mr. Thorp. I have not any figures on that. We have five or six 
different types of ships, and it depends upon the season of the year 
to some extent as to what it costs. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you not give some general idea of it for the benefit 
of the committee? 

Mr. Thorp. I will say that we have one boat that cost us $1,800 a 
day to operate last year. 

Mr. Briggs. Of what does that consist—how much for crew, hoAV 
much for fuel, etc. ? 

Mr. Thorp. I have not the figures with me. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you give us some general idea ? 

Mr. Thorp. There are people here who will tell you Avhat it is cost¬ 
ing to operate the ships on the Great Lakes. You will get that in the 
later testimony. 

Mr. Briggs. But you have no general idea of the approximate cost 
of operations? 

Mr. THORr. We have different types of ships on different runs, and 
they operate under different conditions. 

Mr. Briggs. Hoes not your cost sheet show Iioav much of your cost 
for operation is chargeable against the crew, for instance, how much 
against fuel, how much for food, and how much for repairs and 
upkeep ? 


142 AMENDING SECTIONS 2. 13. AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

Mr. Thorp. I want to tell you this: We have to keep our accounts 
in accordance with the Interstate Commerce Commission’s classifica¬ 
tion accounts. The Interstate Commerce Commission has got all that 
stuff, but we have to keep our accounts in accordance with the classi¬ 
fication accounts, and they show the divisions of everything. 

Mr. Briggs. You do not know what those are? 

Mr. Thorp. I can not give it to you offhand; no, sir; it would be 
impossible. I do not make up those figures. There are a great many 
other figures besides those. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean, is the crew cost half or more than half of your 
other operating expenses? 

Mr. Thorp. It is about 33J per cent of the cost of operation of the 
ship. 

Mr. Briggs. How much? 

Mr. Thorp. About 33 J per cent 

Mr. Briggs, How much for repairs? What proportion of the ex¬ 
pense is that, in round figures, as estimated the best you can ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. It does not run the same each year—repairs and main¬ 
tenance. We put a great many things into maintenance that some¬ 
times are taken out. We were just checked up here by the Internal 
ReAenue Department the other day on our income tax, because we can 
not agree on what ismaintenance and what is not maintenance. 

Mr. Briggs. I was not asking you for the details, but I was just 
asking you for the general percentage in round figures. 

Mr. Thorp. There is no general percentage. 

Mr. Briggs. How t much of the operating costs is your fuel bill, 
ordinarily; 25 per cent ? 

Mr. Thorp. The three big items in the operation of a steamboat 
are wages, fuel, and food, and they run about alike. 

Mr. Briggs. Run about alike? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I was trying to get at; about 33^ per 
cent ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean, they run uniformly; but those three are 
not all equal, are they? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; about one-third each. 

Mr. Hardy. Then you have a whole lot of other expenses, which 
would make each one of them less than 33^ per cent? You have 
certainly got a whole lot of expenses besides those three items? 

Mr. Thorp. Those are the three that are by far the largest. What 
other expenses have we? 

Mr. Hardy. I supposed that you would consider that your invest¬ 
ment was worth something by way of interest, if you want anything 
on it. 

Mr. Thorp. We do not charge interest, 

Mr. Hardy. You do not allow anything for the use of them? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; we do not. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not have repairs? 

Mr. Thorp. We have repairs; yes, sir. They go into the mainte¬ 
nance account. 

Mr. Hardy. You have no bonds to pay interest on at all? 

Mr. Thorp. We happen to have right now a bond for this last year. 

Mr. ^Iardy. You do not write off anything for depreciation ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 143 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; we do. We are compelled to do that by the 
Interstate Commerce Commission’s classification accounts. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you leave the impression that there are no 
other expenses except labor? 

Mr. Thorp. I gave them to you already—the expenses. 

Mr. Hardy. There is no operating expense, except, labor, fuel, and 
food ? 

Mr. Thorp. I said those are the principal ones. The others are 
minor matters—very minor. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Is insurance a minor expense? 

Mr. Thorpe. Yes, sir; it is quite so. Talking about insurance, in¬ 
surance is procurable for the 12 months of the year, and we do 
carry our insurance all the time on our boats that we operate in the 
wintertime. 

Mr. Edmonds. I hope you insure in an American company. 

Mr. Thorp. No; it is utterly impossible to get it in an American 
company. We find that you can not get rates from American com¬ 
panies until Lloyds establish their rates, and American companies are 
very prone to follow Lloyds. 

Mr. Hardy. Am I right in my recollection that you stated that, 
practically, you had to charge the same rates for freight that the 
railroads do? 

Mr. Thorpe. That we had to? 

Mr. Hardy. Or that you did do it? 

Mr. Thorp. I do say that where we are operating now we are get¬ 
ting rail rates, and for two years back on the route where we carried 
most freight we got higher than rail rates. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, you state that you get either the rail rates or 
higher than the rail rates, and have all the cargo you can carry, and 
yet you can not make your boats pay. 

Mr. Thorp. I did not say that. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you not say specifically that you had practically 
all the cargo you could carry ? 

Mr. Thorp. I did not say we could not make them pay. I do not 
think you will find that in the record anywhere. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you said you were laying off some of your 
boats because they did not pay. 

Mr. Thorp. Two years ago; yes, sir; we did. We have curtailed 
our service, and we have abandoned certain service absolutely. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you not state that it was because they did not pay ? 

Mr. Thorp. Because they did not pay. 

Mr. Hardy. That the operating expenses were greater than the 
income ? 

Mr. Thorp, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that when you were charging railroad rates and 
had a full cargo ? 

Mr. Thorp. It was when we were charging railroad rates. We did 
not have full cargoes both ways; no, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought there was some misapprehension or some 
mistake somehow, if you were charging full railroad rates and had 
full cargoes. 

Mr. Thorp. When we were charging full railroad rates we did 
have all the freight we could handle. 


144 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 


Mr. Edmonds. But for many years you have given express service 
and the railroads have not ? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. The people bring their freight down to 
us; we close our doors at 6 o’clock, and at 6 o’clock the next morning 
the Milwaukee teamsters get their green stuff. Last night we prob¬ 
ably had 50 or 60 tons of green stuff from Milwaukee, and it was ready 
for delivery this morning at 6 o’clock. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not understand what you mean by express service. 

Mr. Edmonds. They give the equivalent of what would be express 
service on the railroad at regular freight rates instead of express 
rates. In other words, they use the ordinary railroad rates, but their 
service is equivalent really to an express service, and that is the reason 
they get the business. 

Mr. Chindblom. You may make it stronger than that. You may 
say that they are getting a passenger service for their freight, because 
they carry it on the same boats with their passengers, whereas if you 
send it by rail you have freight service, with the attendant delays in 
the running of freight trains. 

Mr. Scott. But you are limited in your passenger service now; at 
least you are in the wintertime. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. You can not carry on your boats their capacity in pas¬ 
sengers? 

Mr. Thorp. No. 

Mr. Scott. If you could carry on your boats their capacity in pas¬ 
sengers, would it be an attractive investment ? 

Mr. Thorp. Frankly, Mr. Scott, I do not want to say anything that 
is not right. We would not get the passengers, all that we were al¬ 
lowed, but we are carrying them now. We have had as high as 120 
people crossing the lake within the last two weeks, but that boat is 
allowed, I think, at the present time 268, and during the summer 
months she will be allowed 1,200 or 1,300. 

Mr. Briggs. In the operation of your vessels, I would like to ask 
you, have they been operating at a profit, generally, within the last 
two years? 

Mr. Thorp. Not at all times. I want to say that there has not been 
a passenger boat built on the Great Lakes in five years—since 1915. 
That question was asked this morning. That was the last passenger 
boat that was built on the Great Lakes. There were seven passenger 
and freight lines to Chicago, and up to a year ago not one had paid a 
dollar in dividends to the stockholders in five years, and the first that 
was paid was paid out of the sale of capital assets, and not out of the 
operating profits. Boats were taken bv the Government and boats 
were sold. 

Mr. Briggs. How about your vessels generally? Have they paid 
or not? 

Mr. Thorp. Not all; no, sir. We have vessels that for the last five 
years have been showing red figures. 

Mr. Briggs. On the passenger business ? 

Mr. Thorp. On the whole thing, I mean; as a whole. 

Mr. Briggs. On your whole passenger business ? 

Mr. Thorp. Our whole operations for the year have been in red 
figures. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 145 


Mr. Briggs. In the last five years? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; and I am telling you that we did not pay a 
dividend from 1915 up to 1920; 1920 was the first dividend. 

Mr. Briggs. You did pay one last year? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; but all previous to that we did not pay any¬ 
thing. We paid in 1919, but it was out of the sale of capital assets. 
The boats were taken—-one was commandeered—and we sold the boats. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Did you pay any dividend prior to 1919 ? 

Mr. Thorp. The company has been in existence for 60 years, and I 
should hope that we have paid some profit in that time. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. I appreciate that, but I am asking for informa¬ 
tion. 

Mr. Thorp. Certainly. We could not have existed otherwise. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. When was the last dividend the company paid 
prior to 1915 ? 

Mr. Thorp. 1 have not those figures with me. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. You are connected with the company, I suppose? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And you spoke about when they did not pay them. 
Tell us when they did pay them. 

Mr. Thorp. I can not give you the years. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Will you get that for us? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; I can. 

Mi*. Rosenbloom. I wish you would do that. Since you have seen 
fit to make that statement, let us have the dividends paid during the 
life of your company. What I want to get at is this, whether or not 
this seamen’s act in 1915 stopped your dividends or whether they had 
stopped prior to that, by reason of the investment in capital assets, 
as you call it. 

Mr. Scott. How far back, to 1915? 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Say in 1905. Just show what dividends they paid 
prior to that. 

Mr. Thorp. There is one of our principle lines on Lake Michigan 
that has been in the hands of a receiver ever since 1915. 

Mr. Hardy. Did it go in in 1915, or before that? 

Mr. Thorp. In 1915. 

Mr. Chindblom. What line is that? 

Mr. Thorp. The Graham & Morton Transportation Co. 

Mr. Hardy. What time of the year did it go in ? 

Mr. Thorp. I think about October. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the reason for that passenger-ship company 
going into the hands of a receiver? 

Mr. Thorp. Because of the fact that they did not make enough 
money to pay their operating expenses. 

Mr. Briggs. I understand they were not making money enough, but 
why was it—because of the falling off of the passenger business or 
because of this alleged extra number of men in the crew that you 
claim? 

Mr. Scott. One of the members of that company is here. Mr. Thorp 
is not in that company, are you? 

Mr. Thorp. No. 

Mr. Scott. He is here. 

Mr. Briggs. That was not one of his companies? 

48420—21-10 


146 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Scott. No. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you about the freight companies. How 
many of your freight carriers did not make any money ? 

Mr. Thorp. We have no strictly freight carriers. 

Mr. Briggs. Your boats are combination freight and passenger 
boats ? 

Mr. Thorp. Some are and some are not. 

Mr. Briggs. On the whole, what have they been doing altogether? 
Have the operations of your fleet shown a profit? 

Mr. Thorp. I have already said that in the last five years Ave have 
had red figures in our entire year’s operation. 

Mr. Briggs. Of all your vessels? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. You attribute that, do you, to the seaman’s act? 

Mr. Thorp. I attribute it in a great measure to the seamen’s act; 
yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Well, to what extent? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know that I could get doAvn to percentages on 
that thing, because I told you this morning that the teeth of that bill 
do not show in the few people you put aboard that ship. It is the 
things they can do because of the fact that they have got you in their 
poAver. 

Mr. Briggs. May that not arise, whether you haA^e the seamen’s act 
or not? 

Mr. Thorp, I do not say it would not, but it never did. That is 
the point I Avant you to distinctly understand. 

Mr. Briggs. I am talking about other industries. Might not this 
situation have occurred Avithout any seamen’s act or any law of that 
kind? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think it Avould necessarily. I will just give 
you one illustration on that Since the seamen’s act Avent into effect 
one organization particularly—and there were tAvo about the same— 
have seen fit to say, “ It does not make any difference how long your 
boat operates, you must pay your men for 10 months.” We had 
boats operating 75 days, and we are compelled to pay those men 
by the organization for 10 months’ work. Avhether they work or not. 
We had one particular boat that is a strictly passanger boat, in the 
excursion business, that operates 75 days. We haA T e had to pay 
the first officer on that boat $2,750 for that 75 daj^s’ operation, and 
he does not work at any other time. 

Mr. Briggs. What I am talking about, Mr. Thorp, is the opera¬ 
tion of the seamen’s act. I am not speaking about your relations 
with the union, I am speaking about the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Thorp. But those relations with the union organization were 
brought about by the seamen’s act. That is what I want to make 
very clear. 

Mr. Briggs. I understand that is part of your contention here, but 
there is a certain specific- 

Mr. Thorp. Nevertheless, it is true that it is a condition that we 
have been up against. 

Mr. Briggs. In this bill are being offered certain amendments to the 
seaman’s act. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 147 


Mr. Brigqs. You are claiming, as I understand it, that these iden¬ 
tical provisions which are being sought here are such as will give you 
the relief which you seek, and the relief to which you claim you are 
entitled. Now. I understand that a large part of your argument here 
is along the line of your relations with the unions, irrespective of 
these identical provisions that you are seeking to have by way of 
amendment to the seamen’s act. What I am asking about is to what 
extent these identical provisions here are affecting your business. 
These provisions provide, as I understand it, for a longer seasonal 
operation on the Great Lakes. That is one of the provisions ? 

Mr. Thori\ Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. That will relate to revenue? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; that is what I am talking about. 

Mr. Scott. Now. take up the amendment in my bill which allows 
them to employ licensed, certificated lifeboat men, in lieu- 

Mr. Briggs. I am going to take up one at a time, one after another. 
As I understand it, the bill, as introduced in the last session, had that 
one provision? 

Mr. Scott. And I put it in in order to get it through, at the solici¬ 
tation and suggestion of the unions. 

Mr. Briggs. I am just trying to get before the committee the esti¬ 
mate of the savings, etc., and the effect it will have upon the operation 
of vessels on the Great Lakes. Will this provision with regard to a 
longer seasonal operation enable you to operate your vessels con¬ 
tinuously, or where you are accustomed to operating them, at a 
profit ? 

Mr. Thorp. It ought to; yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. You have been operating during this past year your 
passenger vessels, though, at a profit, irrespective of this change? 

Mr. Thorp. We had an exceptional year. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the dividend you declared ? 

Mr. Thorp. Last year ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Thorp. Ten per cent. I want to say this, that this time last 
year you could not get steamboats enough to carry the freight. We 
had a rail strike, if you remember, just about this time last year, and 
we were swamped with business, and much of it we could not handle 
and had to turn it away, and it did bring in a great deal of money 
that we are not getting now. I am not talking on the supposition of 
what we are going to do. We have been in operation all winter; 
we have not lost a day, and we are not carrying 50 per cent of the 
tonnage that we did a year ago. 

Mr. Briggs. That is true pretty much of American ships in foreign 
trade, is it not? 

Mr Thorp. We do not know anything about the marine service. 
We are telling you about the Goodrich line’s own business. I know 
about that. 

Mr. Briggs. I am talking about the conditions that obtain in the 
world commerce to-day. There is a stagnation in all commerce on 
water to-day. 

Mr. Thorp. Then, I suppose we should have no relief on that 
account ? 

Mr. Briggs. That is not the point. I am speaking about the gen¬ 
eral conditions, and you are charging certain specific things. This 


148 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

committee certainly expects some evidence along those lines to 
show that the conditions of which you are complaining are iepriv- 
ing you of relief. To what extent do you expect to make a differ¬ 
ence, if this committee should recommend the extension of the season, 
in the returns your business would gain ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. I have not figured it out. I can not say how much 
business we are going to get from the extension of the season. That 
is problematical, as to what business we would get or whether we 
could fill our boats under the present allowance. I do not know what 
we might turn away because of an excess of business after a given 
date. We can not tell. 

Mr. Briggs. What is your best season for passenger business? 

Mr. Thorp. July and August. 

Mr. Briggs. Does your passenger business begin to fall off mate¬ 
rially after that time? 

Mr. Thorp. Quite considerable; yes, sir; because on our work, 
where we carry the most people between Chicago and Milwaukee, on 
a day excursion boat, and that business is really confined to about 
the school vacations, but we have a service across the lake to 
Grand Haven and Muskegon, where we operate the year round. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean, so far as the present operation of the act is 
concerned, does that interfere with the number of passengers that 
normally apply for passage? 

Mr. Thorp. We have found at times that it did; yes, sir; we 
have turned people away. 

Mr. Briggs. To what extent has that been? 

Mr. Thorp. That has not been heavy, it has been small, but it is a 
fact that we have turned people away; but there are routes on the 
Great Lakes that are much more affected by that particular amend¬ 
ment than we are. 

Mr. Briggs. As far as you are concerned, it does not make such a 
great difference? 

Mr. Thorp. It is not such a great thing. 

Mr. Briggs. The second amendment in here is the one on which you 
rely a great deal, that is the reduction in the number of men in the 
crew, is that it, and the hours of service? 

Mr. Thorp. I have said at the start that the number of men that 
are put down there, the increase of the crew, is a small proportion 
of the harm done by the bill itself, very small. It is the thing that 
you can not see that is hurting us. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Then, you see no specific harm is involved in 
this amendment, do you? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; I do. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Would you like to have the whole bill repealed, 
then ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; I have not said so. 

Mr. Briggs. You are not after the repeal of the whole law, but you 
do not think this will do much good ? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know whether you would care to have me 
read the amendment, arid some of the reasons why. I read this this 
morning. 

Mr. Hardy. Did I understand you to say that you had a particular 
vessel that you operated only 75 days, but you were compelled to pay 
the crew for 10 months’ work? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 149 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; I did. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the name of that vessel? 

Mr. Thorp. The CKristopher Columbus. 

Mr. Hardy. How many members of the crew are there? 

Mr. Thorp. There are three engineers, a master, and two pilots. 

Mr. Hardy. That makes six, altogether. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. And in order to run that vessel 75 days, you have got 
to pay them 10 months’ wages? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You pay one man $1,700? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. What do you pay the others? 

Mr. Thorp. $1,600 to the first officer, $1,400 to the second officer. 

Mr. Davis. Has that been customary all along? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir. 

Mr. Davis. How recently? 

Mr. Thorp. Only since the seamen’s act went into effect. It was 
not the custom previous to that. 

Mr. Briggs. Before the seamen’s act went into effect, did you just 
pay them for the time actually Avorked? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. What would they do during the remainder of the year, 
as far as you know, generally speaking? 

Mr. Thorp. Many of them get positions on other ships where there 
is a shortage of men. Two different men have worked. One of them 
worked in one of the commercial houses in the shipping department. 
There were at least three men that I know who did. One worked for 
an automobile company. 

Mr. Hardy. What did you pay to the other three men? You paid 
one $1,700, one $1,500, one $1,400, and what did you pay to the other 
three men? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know whether I have the salaries during this 
last year or not. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to talk about that particular boat. 

Mr. Thorp. We have other boats. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to get one at a time. 

Mr. Thorp. I understand that. But we have other boats that we 
have had to do the same thing with. I do not know whether I have 
the figures relative to the engineers, but I happen to have the cap¬ 
tain’s, and I know just what they are. But that applies to every boat. 

Mr. Hardy. How many boats have you got that operate only 75 
days where you pay 10 months’ wages? 

Mr. Thorp. We have two, and then we have two that we operate 
under four months, that we have to pay a season’s salary to. 

Mr. Hardy. You have two that you operate only 75 days, and two 
that you operate under four months? 

Mr. Thorp. Under four months. 

Mr. Hardy. And pay 10 months’ salary to all of them? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. ..... 

Mr. Hardy. And you call that the work of the bill? 

Mr. Thorp. I say it never happened until the seamen s bill went 

into effect. 


150 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. When did it tirst happen? 

Mr. Thorp. It has been going up gradually since the seamen’s bill 
went into effect. I find that I have not the engineer’s card previous 
to 1918 here, but they get out a card which shows every passenger 
boat on the Great Lakes, and it states right in there the length of 
time the engineer must be employed. 

Mr. Hardy. How do they make you pay this? They just tell you 
they will not work for you at all unless you pay them 10 months? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; they lay this down before us. 

Mr. Scott. What would have been the effect if you did not pay them 
the scale they specified? 

Mr. Thorp. These men are licensed officers; licensed by the Gov¬ 
ernment. We could not go out and get them. They belong to an 
organization. The mates, the men, the pilots, and the engineers 
have their organizations, and we do not have a chance to talk to our 
men as to whether they will work for less wages. We have to talk 
with the business agent of the unions. That is the only way we can 
get anything. 

Mr. Scott. If you do not pay them, they would not go to work ? 

Mr. Thorp. They say so. 

Mr. Hardy. Were they ready to do any other kind of work for you 
during the balance of those 10 months? Were they willing to do any 
other kind of work for you? 

Mr. Thorp. I presume they would if we had the work for them, 
but we do not have work for them; but we are compelled to pay them 
10 months whether we have it or not. It is the same with the masters 
and the mates. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Thorp, so far as you know, is there any opposition 
on the part of the traveling public to the requirements of the seamen’s 
act with regard to life-saving equipment? 

Mr. Thorp. I have never heard of it, and I never heard of the 
traveling public asking for anything different from that which was 
carried previous to the seamen’s act, when the Steamboat-Inspection 
Service had all to say about what .we should carry in crew and equip¬ 
ment, and I think they are perfectly competent to say how much we 
should carry. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Scott, do you know of any opposition on the part 
of the general public? 

Mr. Scott. There has never been any opposition. The only thing 
that has been called to my attention ever since I have been in Con 
gress has been the insistent, uninterrupted demand on the part of 
my constituents to get this law repealed as far as its fallacious pro¬ 
visions are concerned, which pretend to protect life and do not, and 
in order that the passengers, the people who ride in Michigan, may 
take advantage of the boats and the waters that are there at their 
door, and which they are precluded from taking advantage of in 
consequence of the summer tourist trade, which fills our ships, and 
the handling of the summer tourist trade is over then; but under 
the provisions of the law these ships are taken off and our people 
who live in that, country can not get any benefit therefrom. I have 
never had one line from a union man or one line from a farmer or one 
line from a living soul in my district objecting to the provisions of 
my bill. I presume that I will now since these fellows here from 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 151 

the unions are representing them. They will probably wire up there. 
But every one of my papers has been carrying this stuff for months; 
yes; and they have carried it for the last two or three years, but I 
have never had any suggestion from a living soul that the law be 
left as it is. Every one of them insists on its being changed so that 
we can use our ships. 

Mr. Hardy. On this boat that you have these employees on you 
have got a master and mates that you pay $2,"TOO, $1,600, and $1,400*, re¬ 
spectively, the three highest, and the others you have not named. Do 
you want the law to permit the operation of that vessel without the 
certificated officers? 

Mr. Thori\ They can not do that. No, sir; I should say not; we 
certainly do not; we want competent men to handle the ships. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not a fact that you are required to get certifi¬ 
cated officers, and is not that the thing that makes it difficult for you 
to meet the requirements of the law? You could hire these men if 
you did not have to get qualified men, could you not? 

Mr. Thorp. We secured those same six men previous to the sea¬ 
men’s act, but we did not have to pay them a certain number of 
months per year. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, then, as I understand, you employ these same 
men, or the same number on the same boat, but since the seamen’s 
act they have compelled you through the unions to pay them for 10 
months instead of 75 days? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. What is there in the seamen’s act that enabled them 
to do that? 

Mr. Thorp. It has brought those unions into affiliation. 

Mr. Hardy. The seamen’s act bv < ught the union into affiliation? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. What line of it do you claim did it? 

Mr. Thorp. What line ? 

Mr. Hardy. Yes; what line of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Thorp. Previous to the seamen’s act these men were not 
organized, and they have organized since then. They have found 
that the other unions that were organized were able to get more 
money from us for their work, because we had to haA^e a certain 
kind of man with a certain kind of qualification, and we could get 
nothing but union men. 

Mr. Hardy. Do not your boat people have organizations for their 
oAvn preservation and* looking after their own interests—the boat 
OAvners ? 

Mr. Thorp. They may have had. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you not think it is human nature that these work¬ 
men who are working for you should organize ? 

Mr. Thorp. I haA^e no objection to their organizing; no, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think the seamen’s bill had to create that human 
nature, or was it there? 

Mr. Thorp. No ; it Avas not there. 

Mr. Hardy. As I understand you, on this very vessel, under this 
inspection service, you had to have the six men before the seamen’s bill. 

Mr. Thorp. These particular men. 


152 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. You had to have them under the seamen’s bill, with 
certain requirements and qualifications, to which you are not object¬ 
ing, and yet you say the seamen’s bill is the cause of the trouble. 

Mr. Thorp. I still maintain it, and I will never change my mind. 

Mr. Hardy. Of course, every man is entitled to his own conclusions. 

Mr. Thorp. We are up against it every day. I shall never change 
my mind. I think nobody can change me on that, because I told you 
this morning of some experiences we had with union labor and which 
we would not have had if it had not been for the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Hardy. I know you have expressed that opinion quite fre¬ 
quently. 

Mr. Scott. Do you not carry more men on the Christopher Colum¬ 
bus now than you did before the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Thorp. We do. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Hardy said you have got the same six men. 

Mr. Hardy. I am taking what he said. 

Mr. Scott. But that is a misstatement. 

Mr. Hardy. I asked him how many he carried before the seamen’s 
bill went into effect and he said six; did you not ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; I said those six men, and I then recited, if you 
please, what we pay certain six men on that ship. You asked me if 
we had those men before the seamen’s act, and I said, “ Yes sir; we 
did, and we still have got them,” but the question has never been 
asked me yet whether we have not increased our creAV, and I want to 
tell you that we have increased our crew, but not in this particular 
department. 

Mr. Hardy. Are those the only men you carry for 10 months ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And you have had these same six men or the same six 
places filled before the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. But now you say you have to carry more men under 
the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not have to carry them when you are not 
operating ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You only carry them 75 days? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. So the men you are forced to carry 10 months while 
you work them only 75 days are the same men in the same positions 
that you had before the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Davis. Is it your contention that the increase in personnel re¬ 
quired by the seamen’s act reduces the relative supply and conse¬ 
quently competition for places, and that that is what has caused 
your trouble? 

Mr. Thorp. That has to do with it; yes, sir. 

Mr. Chindblom. In order that the record may not show that the 
Christopher Columbus runs with a crew of six men—those of us who 
have traveled on it, of course, know that that is not so—what is the 
total crew of the Christopher Columbus f 

Mr. Thorp. One hundred and fifty. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 153 

Mr. Hardy. Then the number that you keep 10 months is a very 
small proportion of the crew? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. About 4 per cent? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Chindblom. But that is only an excursion steamer that runs 
from Chicago to Milwaukee and back again? 

Mr. Scott. You had 150 men on board? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. She is a passenger boat and not a war vessel, is she ? 

Mr. Thorp. She does not carry a pound of freight, either. 

Mr. Scott. From the number of people you employ, it would sound 
like the complement of a warship. I did not know whether that 
was so or not. How many did you carry previous to this law, when 
you were operating for the benefit of the public and for a fair return 
to the investors? 

Mr. Thorp. It increased the fire-hold crew 50 per cent; it increased 
the able seamen considerably more than that. I do not know the exact 
amount, but the requirements of the bill increased the fire-hold crew 
of every passenger boat on the Lakes 50 per cent. 

Mr. Jefferis. What do you mean by the fire-hold crew? 

Mr. Thorp. The firemen, oilers, water tenders, and coal passers. 

Mr. Hardy. This particular boat is a passenger boat ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. What does the bulk of that 150 men consist of? Is it 
the steward’s department? 

Mr. Thorp. Quite so. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the seamen’s act require you to increase the 
steward’s department? 

Mr. Thorp. No; but I will tell you what it has done: It has re¬ 
quired us to pay the steward’s department a great deal higher wages. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the seamen’s act fix your wages ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I personally do not recall anything in it that does that. 

Mr. Thorp. I think I have said several times to-day that there are 
a lot of things that we are up against that are not in that bill. 

Mr. Hardy. What proportion of the crew on that vessel you speak 
of belongs to the steward’s department? You run quite a dining 
table, do you not? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. Evidently you have had some information from 
the corner. Probably there are 100 men in the steward’s crew and 
taking care of the cabin. 

Mr. Hardy. And that is not increased at all by the seamen’s bill? 

Mr. Thorp. Except in wages. 

Mr. Hardy. And that is the indirect effect, as you claim it? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Are the waiters who wait on the passengers union 
men, too ? 

Mr. Thorp. You bet your life they are union men. 

Mr. Scott. And if one of the waiters gets sore on the passengers 
and gets off on the dock, does the balance of the crew quit ? 

Mr. Thorp. I have seen them go out in pretty good bunches. 


154 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Scott. And the whole public suffers because you can not run 
your boats? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. In consequence of some employee being offended ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. I want to tell you about how long the fire¬ 
men and the oilers and the water tenders work out of 24 hours, under 
the three-watch system as compared with the two-watch system. 
Running in three watches, assuming a watch starts at 6 o’clock in 
the morning, all the men work four hours—four hours on and four 
off—but the ship does not leave port until 10 o’clock, so the first 
watch has no firing at all. The second-watch man comes on at 10 
o’clock and works until 2. He has fired during that time four hours. 
That takes about all of the time we are operating outside. The third- 
watch man comes on at 2 o’clock, and we are at the dock at 3, so he 
has really fired only one hour, and then his watch ends at 6. The 
boat leaves the dock again at 5, so he works two hours of actual 
firing. 

The next man comes on at 6 and w T orks until 10, the man who was 
on the first watch, and that watch has not done any work in the 
morning at all. He works four hours. The boat is in port at 10 
o’clock, and she stays there until 10 o’clock the next morning. She 
is 14 hours in port—10 hours running and about 14 hours in port— 
so the actual time worked by the first watch is four hours, the second 
watch four hours, and the third watch two hours; so the first watch 
is on duty but four hours, the second watch four hours, and the third 
watch two hours, and they are absolutely off duty for 16 hours. The 
average work done by any one of these men under that three-watch 
system on that particular run is 3J hours that they w T ork out of 24, 
and we have to have 50 per cent more men to do that work than we 
did before the seamen’s act went into effect. 

Mr. Jefferis. That is the run from Chicago to Milwaukee? 

Mr. Thcrp. And return. 

Mr. Hardy. Will you be kind enough to put in your statement 
the number of members of the crew that you have on this Christopher 
Columbus before the seamen’s act and the additional men you have 
had to put on since the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Thorp. I will be very glad to send that in when I get back to 
Chicago. 

Mr. Hardy. So that we will understand just where the condition 
came in. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Another reminder: A statement of your divi¬ 
dends since 1900. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; I will take care of that. 

Mr. Scott. Before the seamen’s law went into effect the merchant 
marine on the Great Lakes had been built up gradually for 50 years, 
had it not—from a small enterprise it had grown into a tremendous 
undertaking, had it not ? 

Mr. Thorp. Our company started business in 1856. 

Mr. Scott. And it had gradually grown, with the restrictions that 
were placed upon it and the regulations that were determined by the 
Department of Commerce? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; and the Steamboat Inspection Service before 
that. 


AMENDING SECTIONS ' 2 , 13, AND 14 CF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 155 

Mr. Scott. ^ on were anxious, and the people engaged in naviga- 
tion on the Great Lakes were anxious to so demean themselves that 
the young men would go to work on your ships; you were encouraging 
the employees on your ships, so that always at the opening of the 
season you would have employees? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

-Mr. Scott. TV hen the seamen’s law went into effect, or before it 
went into effect, it was a negotiation between the employers and the 
employees ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. And under that situation the men got along very well, 
did they not? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And the public was served better than they have been 
ever since ? 

Mr. Thorp. As well. 

Mr. Scott. When the seamen’s law was enacted, for the first time 
in the history of the law, it was placed on the statute books in order 
that one class of labor should only be required to work eight hours a 
day, is that so ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And from that originated the nucleus of dissension 
among the other portion of the crew who were not carried in the bill 
and are not required to work eight hours a day, and it resulted in all 
combining and insisting that everybody should work only eight hours 
a day; is that right ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Scott, I have not read your bill, but does it amend 
or repeal the portion of the seamen’s act that prescribed the hours of 
labor ? 

Mr. Scott. No; only on the short haul. You understand. Judge 
Hardy, that my bill only applies to a particular situation that has 
existed for some time up in my country on the short haul. 

Mr. Hardy. I suppose that when we had the seamen’s bill under 
consideration the reason for putting that limitation in was the testi¬ 
mony introduced as to the unreasonable long hours frequently re¬ 
quired in the Lake service. 

Mr. Scott. I have not touched the long runs from Duluth to Su¬ 
perior or Duluth to Buffalo. I have not attempted to amend that 
at all. 

Mr. Hardy. I think it was unanimously agreed to by this com¬ 
mittee, after hearing all the testimony about the hardships that were 
frequently exacted of the crews, that they were entitled to some limi¬ 
tation. 

Mr. Scott. I remember that most of that came from one man and 
the rest was hearsay; but I remember there was some statement of 
that kind about the hardships. 

Mr. Hardy. Not only one statement from one man, but I do not 
think there was a dissenting voice. 

Mr. Scott. But there was not one scintilla of evidence of any such 
hardships on the Great Lakes: it came from the ocean, quite a good 
deal of it, here and there. 

Mr. Thorp. May I read about the two-watch system on this same 

boat? 


156 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Hardy. I am not discussing the two-watch system; I am dis¬ 
cussing the usual system. 

Mr. Thorp. The two-watch system is the usual system aboard 
steamers. 

Mr. Hardy. I understand this bill does not touch that. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; it does on the short run. My bill endeavors to 
place the one-watch system on runs of 8 hours or less—that is, the 
total run—and on runs of between 8 and 16 hours it places them 
on two watches, from 8 to 16 or less. Those are, Judge Hardy, what 
we call the short runs, and in every one of the instances now under 
the present provision they are obliged to carry three erews. You 
will recall that during the last session I illustrated a rather severe 
illustration, I frankly admitted, and I frankly admit it now, in my 
district. The captain of the boat and the engineer of that boat, and 
I do not know but what perhaps the fireman—I do not know as to 
the fireman, but I know that the captain and the engineer owned 
the majority of the ship. It had run up there, to my knowledge, 
for 30 years, and they never had lost a life. In the light season— 
and by light season I mean the early spring, from April up to June— 
and in the late season, from October until November, they had car¬ 
ried 5 men—the captain, the wheelman, the engineer, the fireman, 
and the deck hand—and they had been operating there for that 
time, and in the heavy season they carried 7 men, but when this 
law came into effect that little boat, that ship, running 3 miles from 
St. Ignace to Macinac Island, never more than a mile and a half 
from port, was obliged to put on 19 men. 

Now, I say that is a rather severe illustration of the point, but it 
illustrates it. And the captain of that ship is a poor man, regardless 
of the fact that he would be classified as a shipowner, and he and the 
engineer have been supporting their families on the operation of that 
little ship for a quarter of a century. That is only one illustration 
of many that happen to occur up in our country, and those are the 
fellows that this bill is particularly aimed to assist. It does, by in¬ 
direction, help the larger concerns, such as the D. & C., but my par¬ 
ticular interest is not in making a substantial revenue for the D. & C., 
only to the extent that I can encourage them to come up in my coun- 
ry and haul the produce of the people I am trying to represent, and 
haul the people themselves. That is all there is to it. 

Mr. Hardy. I understand that the only effect your bill has on the 
provisions of the seamen’s act as to hours of labor is that when the 
vessel runs more than 8 and less than 16 hours, they may be required 
to work longer than 8 or 9 hours a day? I do not know whether it 
is 8 or 9, under the provisions of the seamen’s bill. I am not sure, 
but I believe it was 9. 

Mr. Scott. My bill contains that feature. You can not compel a 
man to work over 9 hours. That is still retained. 

Mr. Hardy. So that you do not change that ? 

Mr. Scott. Not at all. 

Mr. Hardy. That was the question I started out to ask you. 

Mr. Scott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Thorp. Now, take the two-watch system. Under the two- 
watch system which was in existence before the seamen’s act became 
effective, on this particular boat the first watch worked 6 hours out 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 157 

of 21, and the second watch worked 4 hours out of 24, actual firing 
outside. Each averaged 5 hours a day of actual firing, whereas it is 
3^ under the present law, so under the old law they w^ere not very 
much overworked. 

Mr. Scott. I will ask Mr. T. F. Newman, the general manager of 
the ( leveland & Buffalo Transit Co., to address the committee. 

STATEMENT OF MR. T. F. NEWMAN, GENERAL MANAGER, 
CLEVELAND & BUFFALO TRANSIT CO. 

Mr. Newman. I did not know when I came down here that we 
were going to try the labor unions. I thought we came down here to 
talk about this bill and how it hurt us. 

I remember distinctly, and some of the gentlemen on this com¬ 
mittee remember, that when the bill passed the Senate and before 
it came to the committee of the House, there was not a ship in the 
United States that could qualify. This committee helped us out, 
and we have been running, and I was told at that time, and I think 
by some of the gentlemen present at this table now, to try it out, and 
if it hurt us, to come back. Now, it has hurt, gentlemen. There are 
some things that you can not put on people. You can not make 
figures to cover it. Our discipline has been affected. A certain num¬ 
ber of the crew of a ship, outside of her navigating department, must 
be of the rating of able seamen, or the ship can not leave the dock. 
Now, what does that mean? I do not believe the union people have 
taken any advantage of that. I have seen an individual man get 
ashore. I have seen a ship go out without him, and I have seen a 
ship take her chances in violation of the law; not my ships particu¬ 
larly, but they have done it, vitiating her insurance, throwing away 
and canceling entirely her secondary liability, all because one man 
not connected with the navigation of the ship jumped ashore. That 
is not right. 

I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets into the 
seamen’s bill, or has anything to do with it, because it is intricate. 
The bill itself is hard to understand. There are provisions of the 
seamen’s bill to-day that are understood differently by different peo¬ 
ple, and all competent people. That is hard. The ships are differ¬ 
ent. There are very few ships alike. The routes are different, the 
service is different, and no one man can tell in all this big company, 
and there are some smart people here, just what the effect is, or where 
it is going to hurt them. 

I have confined myself in this paper, gentlemen, entirely to what 
the seamen’s bill means to one of the greatest passenger ships on the 
Great Lakes. She was a ship we built in 1913, or 1912 and 1913, 
and she cost us $1,650,000. She is the most expensive passenger ship 
on inland waters in the world. 

Mr. Jefferis. What is the name of it? 

Mr. Newman. The C. & B. 

Mr. Chindblom. What does that stand for ? 

Mr. Newman. That is a name made to cover the route—Cleveland 
to Buffalo—and our corporate name is C. & B. Co., so when you 
call the name of the ship you really call the name of the company. 
That has worked out fairly good. 


158 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


I take it that it does not make much difference whether our line 
has been a successful line financially or whether it has not. The 
fact does remain that I, as manager of that line, can not be extrava¬ 
gant. I can not pay out unduly any money, it does not make any 
difference how much or Iioav little. My business is, and I am hired, to 
see that that line is run economically. 

Here are some things that I am going to call your attention to, 
gentlemen, that are unnecessary, extravagant, and do not do anybody 
any good, and are liable to do us a great deal of harm. 

Mr. Scott. And for which the public is paying? 

Mr. Newman. For which somebody has to pay. Now, I want to 
say one word before I get to that paper about our line. Our line 
runs in sharp competition with the best railroads in the world—the 
Erie, the Pennsylvania, the New York Central, and the B. & O. 
There are 20 trains between Cleveland and Buffalo to-day; there 
were when I made this up, and I think that is true to-day. That is 
our competition, both passenger and freight. We can not raise or 
lower the passenger or freight rates or anything of that sort on port- 
to-port business without the authority of the Shipping Board, and 
we can not lower or raise any rates on rail and the Lake business with¬ 
out the authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and our 
rates are regulated by the rail rate; that is, they have always been 
thought a reasonable differential below the rail rates. It has varied 
somewhat from 3 cents down to 1, according to the valuation. I think 
to-day there is a differential of 5 cents down. 

Mr. Hardy. That is, 5 cents per 100 pounds ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes; according to the traffic. Here is the game: 
All of our traffic men who have spoken of it, from Buffalo, Cleve¬ 
land, and everywhere else—I do not know whether our traffic 
men knew it or not, but I knew it—there are what are known as for¬ 
warding companies in all large cities, in Cleveland, Buffalo, Toledo, 
Detroit, Milwaukee, Chicago, New York, and I guess you have got 
them in Washington, and if you gentlemen have a bedstead that 
you want to send to Cleveland—one single, solitary bedstead, bu¬ 
reau, hatrack, or anything else—they will take it over for you if 
you can not have it hauled, and they will send it through to its 
destination in carload lots at carload rates and charge you just a 
little above or a little below the regular package freight rate, and 
they meet our rates and in some instances beat us. That is what 
they do. We have got all those things to contend with. We have 
got the electric lines and everything else. 

Here is what I believe you gentlemen want to know, and if there 
is anything else after I get through with this that I can tell you about, 
I will be glad to do so. I want to say this, that this statement will 
show that we are carrying 18 firemen on a boat we used to carry 16 
firemen on before the La Follette bill became a law. Twenty-four 
firemen was what this law provided that she should carry; that is, 
it would warrant 24 firemen. They used to stand 6-hour watches, 
three at a time, and 18 or 16 three times would have made it 24. Our 
friends of the union came to me, and after the first year’s operation 
we compromised, and they helped me out to the extent that that boat 
has only carried 18, and these figures are made up on that basis. 
And I have had very little trouble with the unions, as far as my line 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF TITE SEAMEN’S ACT. 159 

goes. It is the advantage that the unscrupulous fellow can take of 
us and put us in a hole that I fear. 

This ship has a total deck crew of 28. The deck crew, exclusive of 
licensed officers, is 18. Sixty-five per cent of the deck crew must be 
able seamen, which is 12, and there is one little thing in the seamen’s 
bill that nobody can explain to me. It says 65 per cent of your deck 
crew must be able seamen, exclusive of licensed officers, and here I have 
a ship that has to carry 21. I have to carry 21 on that boat. Why? 
Because if you read down through the bill and follow it right straight 
along you will find out that every raft on that ship and every boat 
that she carries in the life-saving equipment must either be manned 
by a licensed officer or an able seaman, provided the raft carries more 
than 15 persons. I believe the captains and men all know that no 
raft ought to carry more than 15 persons, and why it was put in I 
do not know. But there are nine men who are put on that ship out¬ 
side of the navigating crew. The 65 per cent fixes the navigating 
crew, and those nine men are required to man these rafts. I will 
admit that we want nine men, but I do not want nine able seamen, 
gentlemen, at $125 a month, when the ordinary fellow, whom we can 
certificate and who is certificated as a lifeboat man, we can hire for 
$87.50 and less, and that provision last year cost that ship, that one 
thing, cost that ship $3,375. 

Mr. Hardy. I wish you would explain that, because it is not quite 
clear to me. I do not understand the operation of the bill in that 
respect. 

Mr. Newman. I do not, either. The bill says that 65 per cent of 
the deck crew—that is, the captain’s crew, the forward crew, exclusive 
of licensed officers—shall be able seamen. Sixty-five per cent of our 
deck crew is 12, and that is the able seamen that we could carry 
under the law. Down below, if you will wrestle it out, you will find 
out in addition to that, if your equipment is sufficient, if you have 
enough equipment on there to make it necessary, you have got to 
carry an able seaman for every lifeboat or raft that carries over 15 
persons, or a licensed officer, one of the two. 

Mr. Hardy. One certificated lifeboat man to man one raft? 

Mr. Newman. We are asking for that in this amendment. 

Mr. Scott. At the present time the law does not allow you to use a 
certificated lifeboat man, although that is the logical thing to do, if 
he is qualified ? 

Mr. Hardy. In addition to the 65 per cent of the deck crew being 
seamen, under this law you have to have certain additional able 
seamen ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; and that is a hardship. That is that end 
of it. I would not care whether the seamen’s act was on the statute 
books or not, so far as those 12 men are concerned. There are 12 /men 
in that navigating crew that I want all the time. They are neces¬ 
sary, and I pay them as much as we have got to pay able seamen. I 
would not care about the law, so far as they are concerned. They 
are necessary. But the nine men are not, and they should not be there, 
and if one of those nine men quit that ship could not go off unless 
they can find another fellow. 

Mr. Hardy. Those nine men are only necessary to man the raft or 
lifeboats? 


160 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Newman. That is the hardship. The other men would not 
make any difference. I do not think it is necessary to certificate them; 
but whether they are certificated or not they would not save my ship 
any money, because I would hire good men all the time. That is the 
forward end, $3,375. 

Now, let us see altout the firemen, and our friend Conway over 
there will bear me out. And remember what I have said now. By 
the grace of the union, by the grace of our good friend Conway over 
there, I am carrying six less firemen on there than I should in strict 
accordance with the firemen’s, union’s rules. The law does not say 
that. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you running under the requirements of the law ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; on a three-watch system. Now, let us see 
where that will land us. 

Mr. Scott. You are not running a three-watch system, are you ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Conway. He is running in accordance with the requirements 
of the law. 

Mr. Newman. The law does not say how many men you should 
have, but you have got to divide them into three watches, and we are 
doing that, and they have got a snap. They call it the old man’s 
home, because that is the kind of a boat she is. You can go down 
there and have as good a time as you can have in any part of the 
ship. 

Let us see about the three-watch system. Under the two-watch 
system I never heard a complaint, and I believe the men liked it 
better. I believe the men on the ship like it better, and you know 
and I know it is better for the ship. If you take three hours on and 
six hours off, you have got to feed them every time you wake them 
up. Every time they go on watch you have got to feed them. That 
is what you have got to do. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. You advertise that, do you not, that the sea air 
whets the appetite? 

Mr. Newman. And it does, but it keeps them in the kitchen 24 
hours. We used to carry, under the two-watch system, four oilers, but 
now, under the three-watch system, we carry six oilers. That is 
what we are carrying. Under the two-watch system we carried four 
water tenders and under the three-watch system five; under the two- 
watch system 16 firemen, under the three-watch system, as I have 
told you, we are carrying 18, and they can make me carry 24 any 
time they want to; but they have not done it, and I am thankful. 
Under the’two-watcli system we carried four coal passers and under 
the three-watch system six. Under the two-watch system the total 
crew was 28 and under the three-watch system it is 35, an increase of 
7. Let us see what that makes. It amounts in the pay roll for those 
seven men to $8,000 in a season on the ship. 

Mr. Scott. That is, in salaries ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes; in the pay roll. 

Mr. Scott. That is not the food? 

Mr. Newman. The food I have figured at $1 a day, and we can not 
feed them for $1 a day; in fact, we did not last year; but, if we take 
it at $1 a day, that is $2,100 more, which makes a total of $13,475 
that is reflected in the pay roll. 

Mr. Conway. Have you not made a mistake there ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 161 

Mr. Newman. No. 

Mr. Conway. You said seven men cost you $8,000. There is no 
man who gets $1,000 a year. 

Mr. Newman. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Conway. I beg to be excused for interrupting you. 

Mr. Newman. I said the total reflected in the pay roll of one de¬ 
partment. 

Mr. Conway. But not in our department? 

Mr. Newman. Not in yours altogether. It amounts to $13,475 for 
the ship. 

Now, let us see what this closing of the season on September 15 
means. It is a very serious matter to us, very serious, the loss in 
passenger revenue, due to the reduction in passenger carrying per¬ 
mitted on September 15, and I will first read there the figures be¬ 
fore that, so as to get you going straight. In the year 1913, when 
this ship came out, she was built to carry, on short runs, 6,000 people. 

Our contract with the American Shipbuilding Co. called for a 
United States certificate for 6,000 passengers on short runs; We did 
not certificate her for 6,000, but we found that we had room enough 
to accommodate them. We certified her for about half of. that, 
3,000, or 3,045. When the seamen’s act went into effect and up to 
the year 1920, inclusive, which was last year, she was allowed 2,272 
passengers. That was a reduction right off the reef of 773, and that 
is a big thing, gentlemen, when you come to figure averages. You 
have got to take your big working days in, and the big ones help the 
little ones, and that is what keeps these boats going. And 773 are 
allowed us only between May 15 and September 15. After September 
15 that great ship—and I wish you could see her, because you would 
like her as well as I do—can carry only 495 people. My gracious! 
That is wrong. 

Mr. Bosenbloom. Why is that? 

Mr. Scott. They do not carry the equipment. 

Mr. Newman. The same equipment is on her after September 15. 

Mr. Bosenbloom. Is it not on account of the change of the season? 

Mr. Newman. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is supposed to be the dangerous season? 

Mr. Newman. Yes. October is the finest month in the whole year. 

Mr. Davis. Is it possible or practicable to carry more life-saving 
equipment than you actually carry on that vessel? 

Mr. Newman. She is built perfect and has got all the equipment 
on her that can be put on her for safety. If you put any more on her, 
you would hurt that vessel more than you would do the passengers or 
anybody else good. 

Mr. Davis. In addition to the lifeboats and rafts you also have the 
belts, do you not? 

Mr. Newman. Oh, yes; for everybody, crew and all. 

Mr. Davis. For every passenger? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Davis. That, of course, they do not give you credit for ? 

Mr. Newman. No, sir; no credit whatever. 

Mr. Hardy. I suppose the reason for that provision was that later 
on the water would be so. cold that it would be dangerous in the water 
with a life belt? 


48420—21-11 


162 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Newman. The water is warmer in October than it is in April. 
We had ice in Lake Erie up to the 19th day of April last year; cold, 
ice water. There is something wrong, and you gentlemen are going 
to fix it for us, and the labor men can not object to it either, because 
they can not question that statement. 

The loss in passenger revenue, due to the reduction in passenger 
carrying permitted after September 15—and this does not cover it by 
half, but it does cover what we could keep track of—the specific busi¬ 
ness lost to the company entirely, as clearly shown in papers attached 
in the case of the American Legion Convention, at Cleveland, from 
September 27 to 29,1920, was 400 passengers. The number of regular 
passengers turned away, that the boat could not carry, is conserva¬ 
tively estimated at 1,500, which makes a total of 1,900 which, at $6 
apiece, makes $11,400, so that I am charging to the seamen’s bill 
$24,875 that that ship could have had and should have had last year 
if it had not been for the provisons in the seamen’s bill that these 
amendments will cure. 

Mr. Hardy. What was the date of that convention ? 

Mr. Newman. September 29. The records are here on that. I 
thought they would be pretty good reading. I am going to read one 
of them into the record. 

Mr. Hardy. I was going to suggest that that business would come 
in under the extension of time that was agreed to in the last session of 
Congress. 

Mr. Newman. Yes; and I was very anxious to have that go through. 

Mr. Scott. The House was very willing to have it go through, but it 
met a snag in the Senate. 

Mr. Newman. I understand so. 

This letter is dated August 16, 1920, at 248 Washington Street, 
Boston, and reads as follows: 


Mr. F. W. Milton, 

General Passenger Agent, 

Cleveland <1- Buffalo Transit Co., Cleveland, Ohio. 

Dear Sir: We are handling the arrangements for the New England posts to 
the American Legion convention to be held at Cleveland September 27, 28, 29, 
and our itinerary provides for returning the party via your line from Cleve¬ 
land to Buffalo on the night of September 29. 

The Massachusetts delegation alone have contracted for accommodations at 
the Statler Hotel for 300 persons, and with the posts from the various other 
New England States I feel sure we will have a .party of approximately 400 
persons returning on September 29 from Cleveland to" Buffalo via your line. 

I understand that the Trunk Line Passenger Association have already granted 
rate of one fare and a third for the round trip on account of this meeting, and 
practically all of these people will hold certificates entitling thein to the reduc¬ 
tion of one-third fare returning. I presume these tickets will be good return¬ 
ing via your line the same as they have in the past. 

We are also going to provide this party with table d’hote breakfast on your 
steamer the morning of September 30, and I would thank you to advise me "rate 
for this meal. We will want a good substantial meal for them. 

Will you also please advise me if you will make a preliminary reservation of 
200 outside staterooms for this party, advising rate, and we will be able to give 
you full and complete information a week or 10 days before departure? 

Yours, truly, 


Geo. E. Marsters (Inc.), 
By H. 


Mr. Hardy. Let me say, parenthetically, that I Avish you could have 
had that convention moved up a few days to give vour ship a chance. 
Mr. Newman. I Avish we could. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 163 


In answer to that letter we sent this telegram : 


__ August 19, 1920. 

Mr. George E. Marsters (Inc.), 

24S Washington Street, Boston, Mass.: 

Your letter 16th. We are sorry, indeed, to decline the valuable business you 
oiter us, Cleveland to Buffalo, Monday, September 29. With the largest steamer 
on fresh water in the world, the unreasonable provisions of the seamen’s law 
wili not permit us to carry the number of passengers in your party. Writing 
you fully. 


F. W. Milton. 

t me dope! I believe that is the kind of stuff you want. The 
figures are as accurate as we have them made. That is what it costs 
the ship. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you have round-trip rates in the summer between 
those points? 

Mr. Newman. Yes; we had round-trip rates, and special low rates 
every Saturday night, 

Mr. Briggs. Is this $6 rate you are referring to a special passenger 
rate? 


Mr. Newman. This one was the rate. I do not know how the 
rates are made up, but this party was coming in over the New York 
Central and coming back over our route. 

Mr. Briggs. I am not referring particularly to this one party, but 
I was referring generally to the rates during this season. 

Mr. Newman. Generally, our fares are about $5 one way, and 
about $7 round trip, or $7.50. 

That is our story. We have got four ships- 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you another question in regard to the 
certification of that vessel, which you referred to. You referred to 
its capacity being limited, I think, to about 2,200? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs, Was that under the construction given the seamen’s 
act by the Bureau of Navigation? 

Mr. Newman. By the inspection service under the act; yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Under the inspection service of the Department of 
Commerce ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Was the vessel built to carry 6,000 people ? 

Mr. Newman. It was under the United States inspection before 
the seamen’s act. The contract for the ship was let in 1912. 

Mr. Briggs. Certified to by the Department of Commerce to carry 
6,000 people on it? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; that was the contract we made with the 


shipbuilder. 

Mr. Briggs. But you only carried half of them ? 

Mr. Newman. We certificated her for half. 

Mr. Briggs. Under the seamen’s act you carry 2,200? 

Mr. Newman. Two thousand two hundred. 

Mr. Briggs. That bore some relation to the life-saving equipment 
and other things of that character, provision for which was made by 
the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Newman. ^ es, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. For how many people is the life-saving equipment re¬ 
quired under the law, aside from the life belts and life preservers? 



164 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Newman. Life belts are not counted in that—they are counted, 
but they are in excess of what I mentioned. 

Mr. Briggs. I am referring to the other things, like lifeboats and 
life rafts. 

Mr. Newman. From May 15 to September 15, 50 per cent equip¬ 
ment in excess of life belts; that is in the summer. After September 
15, 100 per cent, if I am right, and a very much larger percentage 
of lifeboats. Now, we can not carry any more than we are carrying. 

Mr. Briggs. How many lifeboats do you carry on this vessel ? 

Mr. Newman. Eighteen 30-person boats, besides the crew. 

Mr. Briggs. How many life rafts? 

Mr. Newman. The life rafts are about 24. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the capacity of those? 

Mr. Newman. They run from 15 up to 40, I should say. Now, I 
want to say there is such a diversity of service, there is such a 
diversity of conditions, there is such a great difference in ships that 
it is so hard to get the information in our service right. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know what the winter requirements are as to 
life-saving equipment ? 

Mr. Newman. One hundred per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. One hundred per cent of the passengers ? 

Mr. Newman. One hundred per cent equipment for the full number 
of passengers and crew. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the difference as to lifeboats? 

Mr. Newman. I think it changes from 60 to 40 or 40 to 60—it is 
just the reverse. 

Mr. Hardy. Sixty per cent of your life-saving equipment must be 
lifeboats in the winter, and 40 per cent life rafts? 

Mr. Newman. I think so; and in the summer it is the reverse, 40 
and 60. Some one says 75 and 25. 

Mr. Briggs. How many do you carry in the crew ? 

Mr. Newman. That ship carries a crew of 210 in the full season. 

Mr. Briggs. Both summer and winter? 

Mr. Newman. She does not run in the winter. 

Mr. Briggs. What time do you put her up ? 

Mr. Newman. Our season runs from the middle of April to the 
middle of November. 

I just want to say that our service, gentlemen, and I think we have 
got the best boats we know how to get, the best builders we could 
have to build them, and the best designers—our service comes nearer 
to the long-haul ferry service than it does to a steamship service. 
You can not compare it with the Lake carriers’ proposition. I do 
not believe it would hurt the Lake carriers very much. They do not 
care very much one way or the other. I do not like it, and I do think 
it affects the discipline; I do think it has a serious effect on our effi¬ 
ciency, but they are not hurt so bad. 

Mr. Hardy. How many did you figure you would be permitted to 
carry to that convention on the 29th of September ? 

Mr. Newman. Four hundred and ninety-five is all we were allowed. 
How could we carry that party of 400 when we were turning people 
away that were a part of our regular business ? 

Mr. Hardy. I was trying to figure on the percentage basis what 
you had to have for your summer runs. You had to have a lifeboat 
capacity of 50 per cent, did you not ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 165 


Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Have you kept that ? 

Mr. Newman. We have got the same equipment on all the time. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not know how you figure it. 

Mr. Newman. I do not either. 

Mr. Chindblom. For the record, I find in the regulations of the 
seamen’s act, under the head of “Maintenance of boats,” this pro¬ 
vision : 

A licensed officer or able seaman shall be placed in charge of each boat or raft. 

Mr. Newman. Read on a little further. That say provided the 
raft carries more than 15 persons and that 50 per cent of that raft 
shall be more than 15 persons. 

Mr. Chindblom. That is in another provision. 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. That is what takes, these nine extra men 
in addition to our navigating crew. My gracious ! 

Mr. Hardy. Was not that requirement one of the reasons why cer¬ 
tificated lifeboat men were included, and was it not true that a great 
many of the stewards and the crew were qualified under that? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; and we suposed that the certificated life¬ 
boat men were going to take the place of these nine men, but when 
the bill came out of the Senate, the committee of Congress and the 
Senate, they had this provision in there about putting the able sea¬ 
men on the rafts. 

Mr. Hardy. I think I remember your being down here when we 
were discussing placing in the bill the provision for certificated life¬ 
boat men to take charge of some of these lifeboats, and things of that 
kind ? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. And that was gone over with a view to supplying the 
necessary number of men by taking other members of the crew, the 
steward crew, and having them train and certificated as lifeboat 
men? 

Mr. Newman. Yes, sir; I think that was your idea. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes; I think that was the general idea under which it 
was done. 

Mr. Newman. But it did not go through. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me compliment you, Mr. Newman. You have pre¬ 
sented your case. 

Mr. Newman. I thank you. 

Mr. Chindblom. Perhaps a thought, Mr. Newman, that able sea¬ 
men would have stronger arms to use the oars, if necessary. 

Mr. Newman. Perhaps. 

Mr. Hardy. No; it specified that the stewards might suffice as 
able seamen. 

Mr. Newman. I will tell you how it came about. Why do they 
make us carry 50 per cent on a raft carrying more than 15 persons, 
unless it was to get able seamen on there. A 15-person raft is better 
than a 40 anyhow. I guess that is why they put it on, but that was 
done outside of the committee, I am going to give this commitee 
credit. 

The committee promised us that if we were in trouble and we 
could show it, you would help us, and I believe you will. 


166 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

STATEMENT OF ME. H. MEYRING, GENERAL PASSENGER AND 

FREIGHT AGENT FOR THE GRAHAM & MORTON LINE, OF CHI¬ 
CAGO. 

Mr. Meyring. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, our line operates on 
the southern portion of Lake Michigan. We operate across the lake 
to St. Joseph, Benton Harbor, and Holland. St. Joseph and Benton 
Harbor are 60 miles across the lake and Holland is 100 miles. 

Mr. Scott. When did you organize and how many ships have you 
had and how many have you now ? 

Mr. Meyring. We have been in operation for 45 years or more. 
Previous to the seamen’s act we operated five steamers. Our steamers 
are combination package-freight and passenger boats. During the 
years 1918, 1919, and 1920 we operated but three steamers. We are 
now and have been for some years in the hands of a receiver. 

Mr. Rosenblgom. For how long have you been in the hands of a 
receiver ? 

Mr. Meyring. Somewhat over five years. Last October and No¬ 
vember we were operating one steamer at that time, the City of 
Grand Rapids , and she was running full of freight each trip—in 
fact, turning business away. We could not handle the business. Our 
freight rates are the same as the rail rates, and that steamer re¬ 
ceived only that business, and, refusing business each trip, was not 
making expenses. We were compelled to discontinue our service, 
notwithstanding the fact that we had more business than we could 
handle. That is practically the situation with our line. 

Mr. Chindblom. What was the tonnage of that ship ? 

Mr. Meyring. That ship is about 3,000 tons. 

Mr. Roseneloom. No law could help you at all if you had capacity 
business and still could not make any money ? 

Mr. Scott. Of course, you understand they could not carry all 
their capacity of passengers after this limitation in the provision 
of law became effective? 

Mr. Meyring. That ship carries 870 passengers from May 15 to 
September 15. 

Mr. Scott. And after and before those dates? 

Mr. Meyring. One hundred and seventy. The only thing that 
would help us would be such provisions of the law whereby we could 
reduce our operating expenses. The seamen’s act, of course, is not 
the whole cause of it, but it is one of the contributing causes. 

Mr. Briggs. What are the causes that you attribute this condi¬ 
tion to? 

Mr. Meyring. One of the causes was last year the advanced cost of 
fuel and food—we do supply the crew—and also the extra cost of 
wages entailed by the unnecessary men as the result of the seamen’s 
act. 

Mr. Briggs. Were you in the receiver’s hands when the seamen’s 
act was passed? 

Mr. Meyring. We were in the hands of the receiver. The act was 
passed after that but it did not become effective until some time after 
passage. 

Mr. Briggs. November, 1915? 

Mr. Meyring. Passed in March. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 167 

-W' ^kioos- It became effective in November after that month 
or March? 

Mr. Meyring. Yes. 

® 0SENBL00 M. When did you go into the hands of a receiver? 
Mr. Meybing. October, 1915. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Before the act was effective? 

Mr. Meyring. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Were there some other causes? 

Mr. Meyring. There were some other causes, it is true, but at the 
same time we have been struggling to get out of the hands of the 
receiver, but have been handicapped by those other matters to 
which I have alluded. 

Mr. Scott. In the past they have conducted a ferry service be¬ 
tween Muskegon and Milwaukee. How many ships were operating 
there ? Are you familiar with the service over there ? 

Mr. Meyring. Not there; only from general information. I think 
somebody else is here that is familiar with that subject and might 
be able to tell you. 

Mr. Thorp. There are two. 

Mr. Scott. Operating two now—they were operating four ? 

Mr. Thorp. Not ferries. They were operating two ferries and 
two package freight boats. They are operating only one package 
freight and passenger boat now. 

Mr. Scott. So that they have taken off how many? 

Mr. Meyring. One. There is one less boat there than were op¬ 
erated. 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me ask you whether the fact that we entered 
the war in April, 1917, whether the conditions which existed during 
the time we were engaged in the war affected the amount of pas¬ 
senger traffic that you got? 

Mr. Meyring. It had a tendency to reduce to some extent, but it 
increased the freight traffic correspondingly, so that the general 
tendency of the war was to help the boat lines rather than injure 
them. 

Mr. Chindblom. I had the impression that the number of people 
going out of Chicago, for instance, to the resorts up north, was con¬ 
siderably reduced. That would not affect your line, but it would 
affect some of the other lines? 

Mr. Meyring. It would affect the longer lines. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you ordinarily have more passengers than you can 
accommodate under the law, or is that only occasional excursions 
and things of that sort? 

Mr. Meyring. On excursions we generally have more passengers 
than we can accommodate under the law. 

Mr. Hardy. Ordinarily how does it operate? 

Mr. Meyring. On ordinary runs, as a general rule, we do not, but 
there are occasions when we do. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the reason for your company going into the 
hands of a receiver? Of course they did not make operating ex¬ 
penses, but I mean by that—through what causes ? 

Mr. Meyring. The only cause I can explain is that the operating 
revenue was in excess of the operating receipts. 


168 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean by that did you have excessive costs at that 
time for fuel or was it due to crew charges or was it for lack of 
business ? 

Mr. Meyring. I can not assign any special reason. Probably the 
lack of business had something to do with it. 

Mr. Briggs. How long before 1915 had your company declared a 
dividend—how long previous to that time? 

Mr. Meyring. We had never declared a dividend previous to that 
time, and have never declared one since. 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me ask you, were your financial difficulties due 
to some recent occurrences immediately prior to the appointment of 
a receiver, or were they the result of operations for a long period 
of time? In other words, was there any immediate cause of the 
receivership proceedings, or was it resulting from conditions which 
had existed for a long time prior? 

Mr. Meyring. From conditions which had existed for a long time 
prior. 

Mr. Davis. Do I understand that you have operated for 45 years 
without paying a dividend? 

Mr. Meyring. We have never paid a dividend since we have been 
in business. 

Mr. Briggs. You have great faith. 

Mr. Scott. They are sticking to it. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. What are you going to do when you are sticking? 

Mr. Meyring. We have come in here with the expectation that you 
gentlemen are going to give us some legislation which will enable 
us to pay a dividend in the future. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Have you anything left to work with—you are 
still working? I will trade you some more oil stock before that. 

Mr. Meyring. We may seriously consider that proposition. 

Mr. Chindblom. I think it is a good time to say that the Graham 
& Morton Co. has done a great favor and has contributed very much 
to the comfort and pleasure of the people of Chicago while they 
have been failing to make dividends on their investment. 

Mr. Meyring. The people are the only ones who have benefited by 
our operations. 

Mr. Davis. What is the ordinary life of one of those steel boats ? 

Mr. Meyring. Their depreciation is very slight when they are 
properly taken care of. There are steel boats on the Lakes that' have 
been in operation 25 years and still are in splendid condition. There 
is a technical gentleman here who can tell you more about that than 
I can. 

Mr. Thorb. The largest such boat built on the Great Lakes, and, I 
think, perhaps, in this country, is owned by the Government and is 
still in existence to-day, called the Michigan, now called the Wol¬ 
verine. I know that when Mr. Truman Newberry was Assistant 
Secretary of the Navy he had some of the plates callipered and they 
could not find any deterioration, and it was over 50 years old then. 

Mr. Scott. In other words, then, Mr. Thorp, on the Great Lakes 
we do not have the depreciating effect on the ships that they suffer 
in the salt water? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely not; none outside—it is more inside, and 
it all depends on how they take care of it on the inside. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN 7 S ACT. 169 


STATEMENT OF MR. 0. S. DUSTIN, TRAFFIC MANAGER OF THE 
ASHLEY-DUSTIN LINE, OF DETROIT. 

Mr. Dustin. I am from an old steamboat family. My brother has 
been coming down here for years. He is too old now\ and he has 
sent the kid. The kid has been on the job 35 years. Before that he 
went to school. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. In the dry dock now? 

Mr. Dustin. No, sir. I have a statement here. You have heard 
so much about the steamer Frank E. Kirby. We withdrew her a 
year ago and laid her up at the dock and refused to run. Well, in 
April, 1911—a little boat she is, a little side-wheeler, 206 feet long, 
42 feet beam; she carries about 200 tons of general merchandise, and 
her route is to go down to Put in Bay, Kelley Island, Middle Bass, 
Sandusky, sometimes North Bass, and in the fruit season we went 
over and picked up fruit along the Ohio shore—in 1911 the little 
boat made $8,087.88. 

Mr. Chindblom. Net profit? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes; that is her profit. That is her gain over revenue 
and expenses. Now, then, you come up to some more years. That is a 
very good year. Next year she made only $1,600. The next year 
she made us $4,000, and finally, coming up to 1915, she made us 
$30.93; then she commenced to lose money for us. In 1916 she lost 
$1,104.83; the next year, 1917, the loss was $4,334.72. We were taking 
care of people and losing money. In 1918 she lost us $6,398.59 
and in 1919 she lost us $8,208.12; and we had her ready to go out even 
last year, but they came down making demands for three-hour watch 
all over the boats and jumped the engineers’ wages, the captain’s 
wages, etc., and we said, “We are done.” We notified them. 

Mr. Rosenblum. What was her name? 

Mr. Dustin. The F . E. Kirby , known all over the lake. In that 
time we have been cutting down her season and have not been giving 
service. In 1911, when we made that $8,000, we ran 208 days ; in 
1919, when we lost that $8,000, we only ran 167 days. We picked 
the best part of the season, and the boat did not run early and late. 
We did not start and run from ice to ice when the ice starts again, 
as we used to run in the old days, or she would have lost a great deal 
more money. 

Mr. Hardy. You would have lost more if you had run longer ? 

Mr. Dustin. Is not that natural ? 

Mr. Scott. I wish you would read into the record, so that these 
gentlemen will appreciate it, the figures showing the amount of busi¬ 
ness you did there when you were operating for the benefit of the 
people, the amount of business you did when you made a little money, 
and the aggregate amount of business you did when you lost $8,000. 

Mr. Dustin. That is a very good point. In 1911, gentlemen, we 
took in as our total revenue $43,096.74. It cost us $35,000 to operate, 
which gave us a profit of $8,087. In 1919, to show that the business 
was not slipping and we were still doing business, we took in 
$60,840.97. It cost us $69,022.19 to operate. These boats are kept, 
as another man said here, taking them off of interstate-commerce 
bookkeeping records and put down in tabulated form here on this 
sheet [indicating], but you can verify these figures if you want to 
look these up. 


170 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. You make this sworn statement to the Interstate Com¬ 
merce Commission ? 

Mr. Dustin. Sure. 

Mr. Davis. You did not have any difficulty paying income taxes? 

Mr. Dustin. We are an old company, and pay our bills. 

Mr. Rosenbltim. He may have another boat or two stored away. 

Mr. Dustin. I am talking about the losing stuff. This is losing 
stuff. Here is a boat that did not pay and this is an old company. 
My old dad sailed these Lakes 80 years ago. He is dead a good many 
years, and my brother is old and I am no chicken. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. What other boats do you operate ? 

Mr. Dustin. The steamer Put in Bay. She is a nice, big excursion 
boat. I started to say we are an old company and have got a lot of 
widows to look after. We do not think it is a square deal to our 
stockholders, a small company, for stockholders to run a proposition 
that is losing us thousands of dollars and have the boat that is mak¬ 
ing us a little money pay the expenses of this boat running. That 
is what they are all hollering for—service to have their peaches 
brought out—and the drug houses want carloads of drugs taken to 
Sandusky to send to Baltimore, and we discontinued the service 
and they are making a holler. If you want to know the cost of coal 
and the wages, increased wages, I have got it right here to give it to 
you. 

Mr. Chindblom. Give us the wage item for 1911 and 1919. 

Mr. Dustin. The wages in 1911 on that boat were $12,625.75; the 
wages in 1919 were $22,267.72. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. That is on a shorter season. 

Mr. Dustin. Wages; no more men. Yes; it is more money in this 
way, with the extra men the seamen’s law requires us to carry. In 
1911 we had two firemen and two engineers; now we have three fire¬ 
men, three coal passers, two engineers, and two oilers. The engineers 
used to do the oiling and the deck hands used to pass out coal for 
the firemen when they did not come after it themselves. 

Mr. Jefferis. Why can not they do it now? 

Mr. Dustin. They will not do it. The law requires that. The fire¬ 
men used to work from Sandusky, five hours run, split the watch and 
have a five-hour run back and split the watch; that is too damn 
hard work for firemen. Do you want them to go down and fire the 
whole fire two or three hours on every night? We have allowed this 
to the firemen. For a boat on the Lake that is not necessary. I have 
been in the game. I have had to go to the starboard side and had to 
be on the walking beam putting in to dock two or three times. The 
second engineer and engineer used to do that. 

Mr. Hardy. This seamen’s law requires more oilers ? 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Does that boat carry passengers? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Does it operate a bar ? 

Mr. Dustin. In the old days. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Did that add something to your profit? 

Mr. Dustin. In 1911. I will tell you about the bar. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And the slot machines. 

Mr. Dustin. There is a very wise gentleman there. He paid us a 
couple of thousand dollars for the bar. He paid us that, and if there 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 171 

was any more benefit than that he got it. That is all we got out of 
it—a couple of thousand dollars. After 1913 the newspapers got 
after the boats in Detroit—this was before prohibition came—and 
that kind of threw us off of the bar business. There was a good profit 
in the bar and the slot machines if you fix them right. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. They do that in Detroit—fix the machines? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. It is another 75-25 proposition. 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. We do not have it on the boats any more. 

That is my general statement, gentlemen. I will tell you why we 
laid up the Kirby. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. Were the Kirby boilers condemned by the Steam¬ 
boat-Inspection Service, or anything of that kind ? 

Mr. Dustin. No; we have always kept our steamboats up—kept 
the hulls up. Every boat has a good hull. Mr. Thorp told you 
about the Michigan , an old hull 50 years, where they kept her good 
inside and kept her oiled. The boilers you have to keep them up. 
The}^ have not been condemned. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. Do you say they have not been condemned? 

Mr. Dustin. If we got a winning proposition, are we going to keep 
our steamboat and put bad boilers in her? If we are not making 
money, if we are losing $9,000 on a boat we will lay her up. We had 
one boat that lost us $8,000 to operate. 

Mr. Hardy. What year was that ? 

Mr. Dustin. It was 1919, the last year she ran. 

Mr. Hardy. You lost $8,000 then? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. How did you come out in 1915 ? 

Mr. Dustin. We made $30.93. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. That was before the seamen’s act went into effect ? 

Mr. Dustin. The act went into effect in the spring of 1915. 

Mr. Hardy. November. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. That was at the end of 1915. How did you make 
out in 1914? 

Mr. Dustin. We lost $246.13. Do you want me to tell you why? 

Mr. Kosenbloom. Yes; since you can not blame it on the seamen’s 
act. 

Mr. Dustin. We began on the fruit crop. We have had a lot of 
lean years. It was a hard winter and the peaches did not come up, 
and it cut us down on the receipts. In the spring of 1914 it was a 
very cold year and the peach trees all froze, with the result that 
there was no fruit in the fall of the year. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you have any bar that year ? 

Mr. Dustin. No. 

Mr. Hardy. When did that go out of operation ? 

Mr. Dustin. 1913; we lost the bar then. It was only a couple of 
thousand of dollars. 

Mr. Hardy. If you had gotten that $2,000, it would have given 
you a little profit in 1913 instead of a loss ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes; that is true. 

Mr. Citindblom. Did you lose the peach crop in 1915 ? 

Mr. Dustin. Since the trees froze they have not begun to bear 
good until recently, when they just commenced to come back. Some¬ 
times there is a lean year and sometimes the crops are pretty good. 


J 72 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. You will never get back the bar? 

Mr. Dustin. No; we will not get the bar back. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the condition of the peach crop the year 
you lost so much money ? 

Mr. Dustin. 1919? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. 

Mr. Dustin. Just a fair crop. The fruit just commenced to come 
back a little. We only ran to September 28 that year, and the fruit 
crop was very early. The places we ran to November 9 we used to 
run until Thanksgiving time. 

Mr. Scott. That year of which you spoke, the last year where they 
ran and lost $9,000, they did an actual gross business of $60,000, and 
in the year where they made a profit of $8,000 they did less than 
$40,000 business. 

Mr. Briggs. I observed that. I was going to ask the witness about 
that tabulation. 

Mr. Dustin. I will put it in the record. 

Mr. KirkPx\trick. In that year the wages doubled over 1911? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. That was in the shorter season ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. We were operating 167 days that year, in 1919. 
In 1911 we operated 208 days. 

Mr. Scott. And it cost you how much ? 

Mr. Dustin. $12,625.75 in 1911. 

Mr. Scott. How much in 1919 ? 

Mr. Dustin. $22,267.72. I am going to turn this record in and 
will tell you that along up to 1913 we kept the books our way, and 
after that had to keep them according to Interstate Commerce Com¬ 
mission rules, and it is itemized out more. Here there is just one 
group for the wages in these three years, and when you get over here 
[indicating] it shows the deck wages, the engineer wages, the stew¬ 
ard’s wages, etc. 

Mr. Hardy. Have not the wages in all lines of employment about 
trebled between 1911 and 1919? 

Mr. Dustin. I do not know. 

Mr. Hardy. They had with us, I know. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. How were your rates in 1919 as compared with 
1911? 

Mr. Dustin. Getting more money. I remember when we used to 
carry peaches for 12 cents a bushel. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. What were you carrying them for in 1918? 

Mr. Dustin. Twenty-five to twenty-six cents. There were not so 
many peaches that year—last year there was a big bumper crop. A 
little barge ran down to Detroit; they got 22 cents a bushel for them. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. That was testified to ? 

Mr. Dustin. I thought it was too much. 

Mr. Kosenbloom. You did not carry any last year? 

Mr. Dustin. No; this other boat carried just a few of the early 
fruit. It did not amount to anything. The peach crop did not come 
until after Labor Day, what we called the peach crop. They are 
awfully sore on us because we did not run the boat. She certainly' 
was handy for them. 

Mr. Gahn. Are you going to operate the Kirby this year? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 173 

Mr. Dustin. We will operate her if we can. 

Mr. Briggs. To what do you attribute all this loss; to the addi¬ 
tional number of men in the crew or that and other causes ? 

Mr. Dustin. Take a little boat like that and, of course, the engi¬ 
neers going from 4 men to 12, that is quite an increase in wages, 
and they are getting twice the wages as it shows here, and then I 
may tell you another thing that is mentioned. These A. B. men, as 
soon as you put them up and get brass buttons on them they refuse 
to work. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you have some boats that made a profit in 1919? 

Mr. Dustin. Sure. 

Mr. Hardy. What one was that ? 

Mr. Dustin. The Kirby. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you have anv running over the same line as this 
Kirby? 

Mr. Dustin. She ran over the route to just call for the passenger 
business; no room to carry freight, but we just ran her from Decora¬ 
tion Day to Labor Day. The passenger boats made money in 1919. 

Mr. Hardy. Did all your freight boats lose you money ? 

Mr. Dustin. One boat, the Kirby , that is only a freight boat. 

Mr. Hardy. All your boats made you money but that ? 

Mr. Dustin. There is only one other boat, an excursion boat. 

Mr. Hardy. You just had two boats? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. The Kirby and the other one ? 

Mr. Dustin. She just runs from Decoration Day to Labor Day. 

Mr. Hardy. That boat made you a profit ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. That is, the company owns two boats? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

(The statement referred to above is as follows:) 


Steamer “Frank E. Kirby ” seasons 1911 to 1919 . 


174 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


00 1-H 

8” 

co 


cm 00 

1 -H LC 

co 




CO rH 
CO oc 
OS Os 


P-!> 


a> 


:8 


Tf o 
CO CO 
00 

oTef 


OC 00 

CM* o 

T* iO 


oo o 

CO oo ^ 
CO ‘O 


CO 

os 


O CO 

oc co 

i-TcO* 


5 • • ' • o? 

CO • • • • os 


»o 

CM 

CO 


8 


r- Tt< 
CO i“H 

o r- 

CM* CO* 


• CM 

• CO 

' oo*' 


• CO 

• ^ c- 

• o 


»— o. cococor^cocMooor- 

CO’t Oh rH CM h- ‘O 

CDiOOhcO Os CM 


1 t"- >0^0 
• H Os CO 
» Os H 




rp 

oc; 

oo- 

u<* 

"S o 

£ 


«D t- 

1-1 o 

<>4 . 




os 

H *—H 

f-H *v 

fcn<M 


> OS C 


> »c i 


) CM CM 

CO LO O CM CO 
CO h 00 CO 00 ' 
■"■+* i-H I''- CO 

o'er co*"co' 

CM 1 -H 


^h-OOOcOCM^OOr^OSOO^OcpoOt^iOOOCMOO 
‘CHCMOCO’^COOO^OOt^cCHiCTt'XCJcO 
CMHNhOH 1 -H N Cl h H H H O CM 

r^VTr-%H ocT i-T cm"' 


HfOOONrf 

CM os CM 1 -H lO 
CO CO oo 


Tft CM CO CM 1 -H 
Os Os ^ CM 
CO H Tf CS CO 


ss 




QNcOOOJ 
00 »0 00 O CM 
C Tp CO 00 CM 


»c t- 

CM H 


s 


NHQjOH 
o c o oc CO 
CM r- CO 05 O 


»o CO 

CM i-H 

<y? 


O 1-1 
CM*" 


NiCOCMCOO^ONCOiOrf 
HorojcCOH<OOOO^M 
CO-^CCOir^CM-H lOCMN 


co »o »o h 

co oo uo r- co 
i-H co o 


co 1-H CO 
tp cm 
o 


:8 


»o co r^* — hh rtn x h x cm oo c 
-<XhCOh00CMCOiOXX»O( 
« N C CO N ih CM H(NNC 

I^i-T'cm'cm't-T »o" 


LO CM os 


p<+? 

<H Oh 

^ <D 

m 


lO 

^ 00 s 
• CM 
u, . 
Ph^ 

^ o 

CO 


co oc »o 

i—* CO CO CO CO 

CO-fCOON 

CM* ‘cT t-T Tf' lcT 
CM CM 


00 »C CP 1-H Os 

t-h o CO os CO 


- . ___ _ . JCOXCOO‘OiCCM 

) O 1^ O to O 61 iH X lO O O N CO CM LO CM 

os 00 ^ 00 00 CM hH cDCM^hhO CO ^h 


8®o 


• CM CC 

• cc 


CMIO^COCMCOOCOCM^CMO: 


> co oc r- co o 

> © -* C 0 co »C 
CM CO COH 


NOON 
OP co © CO 
CM CM CM 


O CM CM CO CO 


cr © 

S a - 

<3 S 
'C Cu 

O o 

3* 

E 8 
£ > 





w 






m 




£ 



p 






W 




O 

co 



5 






OQ 




c3 


c3 

H 










<D 


no 

> 






Clh 




GO 


fcn 

K 











3 

o» 

Ph 

03 






w 





& C. 

•C g £ 

bo® <o 


Ec 

O s 

c c 


o 

o; w c; c ^ 

£ C« S 

fepHC^OJ 


c3 

-H ' 1 

o 

r* 


Kfj >. 

^2 tc 

Oh . d 
Oh Oh*S 

w wtj 

^ © 

C 0JT3 

£^Q-< 


>> 

i- 

co 

1 — iH 
2.2 
«5 03 

£82 
IS’H 

m ^ o k 


i2 M 
gw 

o t- 
<D 


w 


<x> 


H w . 

ES E u 2 
«'§'3 ®Sp 


.S-.r-H 00 ^a 
g-O btijH 

S ^ S2 c6 


c 3 

rH 

■a' 

c c 

<o o 

Oh^ 

^ o 
_ a.' -*h 

0^ w 




S-H CO 

oQEHE^f L "-5jP^OoPHi-3 


c3 C w 

a) ce g 

rt a-S 

O O 03 

cp^c 


CO 

^ co 
<o T 3 
CD ^ 
£ c3 


<D ' 


o; 

t- CO 

-, CO 

1 o 


. o 

• bje* 

• c3 

: ^ 
c3 
.^5 


n ^ V; 

r> CO 

g*-S <u 

. . W ra —' bp . 

..o'Sb^’cia a^ 1 ® 

<u ai_, ® cs 

^ aoaoo 




























































































































































AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. J 7"> 


8 


S3 


So 


so 

so 


A ££)% 

5.3 5 

C3« 5 J 
o 

pQSfifH 


C3 

Ml 


o 

J 


G c/5 

O « 

*3 £ 
.2 5b 

O c— 

2 Q 
ft ft 

2b 1:3 

'O +-> 


ft 

o 


cS 

ft 

CJ 

o 

55 


K 

H 

C 

55 


ft 

x 































1 76 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

STATEMENT OF C. F. BIELMAN, JR., GENERAL MANAGER OF THE 
WHITE STAR LINE, DETROIT, MICH. 

Mr. Bielman. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, we are not, perhaps, 
the only line outside of Mr. Dustin’s line that comes in the category 
that Congressman Scott has been talking of. This bill is aimed to help 
what is commonly known as the short-run line. We operate five 
steamboats from Detroit to Port Huron, a distance of 60 miles, which, 
technically, under the law is not covered at all. It is exempted from 
the law because Lake St. Clair is not considered one of the Great 
Lakes. But it has an indirect influence on that part of the lake. We 
hope so, anyhow, regardless of whether it is in or out. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Dustin, I understand that this boat that lost you 
$11,000 last year was a freight boat, or was it a passenger boat? 

Mr. Scott. Both passenger boats. 

Mr. Dustin. The Kirby is a freight-passenger, little side-wheeler, 
carrying 200 tons of freight on deck and carrying passengers. The 
Put-m-Bay is used for excursion business and has no room to carry 
freight. 

Mr. Hardy. I understood you to say that one made a profit and the 
other a loss ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. That is the reason that the D. & C. ran their boats last 
summer when they got the immense big summer business. They 
could load their boats almost to carrying capacity. The provisions of 
the law did not apply to them, then, as they have got the tourists from 
all over the country coming to the resorts, and this boat that you spoke 
about as the one that they run last year is the kind if boat that does 
not carry aything but passengers and gets an immense resort business ? 

Mr. Dustin. Yes; it runs to the resorts in the summer time. 

Mr. Bielman. On our line from Detroit to Port Huron technically 
we are not under the law, but we have a run from Detroit to Toledo 
on which we operate two steamers normally from April 15 to Novem¬ 
ber 15 carrying passengers and package freight. The provision of the 
law in the proposed amendment as far as the extension of season goes 
does not make any difference one way or the other. After September 
15 we do not do passenger business. If the freight tonnage is there we 
carry it.. We run our steamboats 3 miles close to deep water, and it 
does not make any difference. We are never more than 3 miles from 
shore, but the thing that hurts us, and is hurting us, is the fact that 
we are running two steamboats between Detroit and Toledo, a distance 
of 60 miles—four boats, two each way—and one of the steamers, the 
City of Toledo , it is necessary to carry 18 men in the engine room to 
run that steamboat. This is not fair, reasonable, or just. We have to 
do that under the law, because we do get on the Great Lakes, we get 
on Lake Erie, cross Lake Erie, and from there down to Toledo. We 
must have three oilers, six firemen, three coal passers, and three water 
tenders. 

Mr. Hardy. What is the size of that vessel ? 

Mr. Bielman. Two hundred and fifty-two feet. They will carry 
in the summer time, 1,956 passengers, and will carry about 350 tons 
package freight, general merchandise, carrying nothing but deck 
loads. Those are side-wheel steamers, such as the steamers which 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 177 


operate on the Hudson River. We do not believe it is fair or just that 
we should be required to carry this enormous amount of crew to 
operate a steamboat on a 4-hour run for 60 miles. I say I have no 
fight with my friend down in the corner at all; we get along together 
very well. It seems to me, as Mr. Thorp brought out, that the teeth 
of the law are disguised. Running from Detroit to Port Huron, an¬ 
other of our short steamer runs, the season is only 100 days, except 
for one steamer which runs seven or eight months. The balance are 
excursion steamers and only running during the excursion season. 
Under the law we only have to carry two crews; until last year we 
only did carry two crews, but unfortunately for us, whether it is 
due to lack of the owners’ organization, or whether it is due to the 
extremely good organization of our friends, we do not know, but we 
do know that last year it was necessary to put three crews on all these 
steamers, none of which operate, gentlemen, you understand, more 
than eight hours. 

Mr. Rosenblttm. That is not on account of the law. 

Mr. Bielman. Not on account of the law, but what I am trying to 
show 7 you is the fact that we maintain that the lav r is class legislation 
in so far as it says that we must have a certain man and a certain 
kind of men, and that a certain per cent of your crew must be a cer¬ 
tain kind of men, and it gives those men, as they naturally would 
have, the power to organize and they do organize, and the moment 
they organize they come after you hammer and tongs to put on these 
steamboats, not covered at all by this law, the 3-watch system. 

Mr. Scott. The law requires two crews ? 

Mr. Bielman. Two crews. 

Mr. Hardy. The law of 1915 requires two crews. 

Mr. Bielman. It requires to carry two crews and we wanted to 
carry two crews. 

Mr. Hardy. That is wdiat the law required you. 

Mr. Bielman. That is what the law requires. 

Mr. Hardy. That is, the law we are passing now requires two 
crews. 

Mr. Bielman. I admit it. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, what prevents them from doing the same? 

Mr. Bielman. Not a thing that I know. We feel if the law was 
passed, if that is so, it would take our boats out entirely from the law 
all the way through, and we feel that we might get an adjustment 
with those gentlemen if the law did not legislate. That line is 60 
miles. Naturally, they would come to us and say, you are running 
60 miles or over, and you are carrying two crews. 

Mr. Hardy. I thought you said the law requires two crews? 

Mr. Bielman. Port Huron is a river run from Detroit across Lake 
St. Clair and St. Clair River to Port Huron. Lake St. Clair is not an 
avenue of commerce like the others of the Great Lakes, consequently 
is not covered by the seamen’s law. But the run to Toledo is under 
the seamen’s law. We must have three crews on that run. That is 
where we get our 18 men in the engine room on one steamer. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the law require you to have three crews ? 

Mr. Bielman. Yes, sir. Unless you are running 60 miles you must 
have three crews on the river run whether the law requires it or not, 

48420—21-12 


178 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


and we are strong enough to put it over, and they have the power to 
do it and they have put it over. 

Mr. Hardy. How much crew have you got altogether on the vessel 
that carries 1,900? 

Mr. Bielman. One master, 2 mates, 2 wheelsmen, 2 watchmen, 2 
lookoutsmen, 18 in the engine room, and then the usual steward 
crew, 35 or 40 in summer. 

Mr. Hardy. Carries 1,900 passengers? 

Mr. Bielman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Davis. Are you required to pay the members of the crew for 
a longer period than they actually work ? 

Mr. Bielman. Not the members of the crew. You are required to 
pay officers. That condition that was taken up by Mr. Thorp this 
morning prevails on all lines operating on the Great Lakes. The 
licensed men we must pay for 10 months. But the two crews that 
are not licensed officers, firemen, oilers, water tenders, coal passers, 
lookoutsmen, wheelsmen we only pay for the time they operate. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that condition the result or has it obtained only 
since the passage of the seamen’s law? 

Mr. Bielman. Only since the passage of the seamen’s act, for the 
simple reason that the seamen’s act legislates that number in the 
deck crew exclusive of the licensed officers shall be able seamen. 

Mr. Briggs. There is a requirement that a certain number shall be 
commissioned officers? 

Mr. Bielman. That has obtained since. 

Mr. Briggs. Did that obtain before? 

Mr. Bielman. No. We only paid them at that time for the time 
they actually worked. 

Mr. Briggs. Does the seamen’s act require that these men should 
be such? 

Mr. Bielman. Not at all. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the seamen’s act affect the number of your offi¬ 
cers at all? 

Mr. Bielman. It does not bother your officers at all and only 
affects the decking crew, and by giving the decking crew, by speci¬ 
fying a certain per cent or a certain kind of men, gives those men 
the right to oragnize, which they might have anyway. We do not 
deny that. But then they organize, and the laws of the United 
States Government are behind that union, and every fellow on the 
ship sees those fellows getting good or better conditions. It is not 
a question of conditions and has not been. I do not think any of 
the men that have been employed by any of the passenger lines on 
the Great Lakes have any kick coming on their food, equipment, or 
working conditions. You asked me about how it came that this 
officer proposition came up. All right. As I say, Congress legislates 
the seamen’s union, practically. That is what it amounts to. They 
legislate that the certain per cent of the men organize and make it 
a powerful union because a man is not an A. B. unless he is a mem¬ 
ber, and as soon as he has an A. B. paper they get him in the union, 
consequently that gives the union power. All right. These other 
men organize. The cooks and in the engineer department the men see 
the seamen’s union come along and get pay raised $25 a month. It is 
all right if you can afford it to have everybody make good pay, if we 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 179 

can make it. They get together, and so that looks to him that ought 
to work. We will get an organization of our own and get our pay 
raised,” and they do. The firemen come along and have gotten ab¬ 
solutely their wages legislated, have worked years and years and still 
work the bulk freight boats; would be perfectly willing to; the for¬ 
ward crew still do work on the two-watch system. If you did not 
legislate the 3-watch system in the fire hold, they would be working 
6 hours on and 12 off and perfectly happy. All right; they have a 
union. That is three unions. They all say, “Well, we all maintain 
an office here and we will all work together. You do it and I will do 
it, and if they will not do it for you we will make them do it.” That 
is how the thing grew up. The cooks come along and say, “ We are 
not getting enough. Let us have a union.” Naturally enough, they 
have a union. 

Mr. Hardy. That does not answer the question I asked you. Does 
the law affect these men as to their number in any way ? 

Mr. Bielman. Not at all, excepting, as I said, as far as any actual 
reading of the law; no. 

Mr. Hardy. Are you opposed to any kind of legal requirement as 
to the qualifications of men that should operate these ships? 

Mr. Bielman. Absolutely not. 

Mr. Hardy. Then what per cent would you have to be able seamen, 
if any per cent? 

Mr. Bielman. I do not know that I would have any per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you have no qualifications for the men who 
would run these vessels? 

Mr. BielmXn. I would have qualifications. 

Mr. Scott. If you went to hire a carpenter- 

Mr. Hardy. Let him answer. 

Mr. Bielman. Not being a navigator myself I do not believe I can 
answer that question. 

Mr. Hardy. Without the act I presume the same kind of qualifica¬ 
tions or skill would be required to run a vessel. 

Mr. Bielman. Absolutely; and they were on the run for 50 years 
before this law ever went into effect and ran just as well and better 
than since. A man comes to us green off the farm, and we haye 
five boats, five captains, a captain for each boat. Every man in the 
White Star Line, with the exception of one, started on our steamboats 
as a deck hand and is now sailing our boats. Two of them came as 
green boys off farms and worked up until they knew something. 

Mr. Hardy. Would not they be entitled to the certificate of an 
A. B.? 

Mr. Bielman. They can not get it now. 

Mr. Hardy. How t long have they been working ? 

Mr. Bielman. Most of them have been there 15 or 20 years. 

Mr. Hardy. What prevents them from getting the certificate? 

Mr. Bielman. As I understand it licensed officers can not hold 
A. B. certificate. 

Mr. Hardy. I think most licensed officers have an A. B. certificate. 

Mr. Bielman. I do not know. Then these men came to work for 
us. I presume the men that were sailing the boats at that time knew 
something about navigating, masters, and mates. These men were 
not promoted at all until they showed they could navigate. A man 


180 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

who was a wheelsman would make a deck watchman and would 
naturally do other work about the ship. Now that they have the 
A. B. all a man has to do is to make an affidavit that he has had 
the experience. In those days it was promotion by merit, and now 
you take a man and place him over other men on his say so, and un¬ 
fortunately there are a great many people who do not tell the truth 
when they make affidavits. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you be in favor of repealing the laws requiring 
certain qualifications for a man on deck? 

Mr. Bielman. I do not know that I would, but I would be very 
strongly in favor of leaving the matter up to the Department of 
Commerce through a board of supervising inspectors or Steamboat- 
Inspection Service men, who are technical men and know the qualifi¬ 
cations required. 

Mr. Hardy. You think, then, that an executive officer could deter¬ 
mine much better than the legislative branch? 

Mr. Bielman. Yes, sir; I certainly.do. 

Mr. Scott. With their various inspectors centered around the 
Lakes and ocean. 

Mr. Bielman. I think this thing should be regulated by the De¬ 
partment of Commerce. 

Mr. Scott. Was there not complaint when you left it to the execu¬ 
tive officer before the act of 1915 as to whether you could get by with 
one kind of crew or not ? 

Mr. Bielman. That might be true in any case. That was before 
my time. 

Mr. Hardy. The inspector could make things hard or easy. 

Mr. Bielman. That is only true to a certain extent. The rules were 
laid down by the Steamboat-Inspection Service and carried out by 
local inspectors. 

Mr. Hardy. You think they ought to be given a free hand, without 
any law restricting their discretion. 

Mr. Bielman. I think, the executive branch of the Department of 
Commerce should make regulations for the Steamboat Service. 

Mr. Hardy. Of course, that gives some power to them. 

Mr. Bielman. That is very true. That is only my opinion. I do 
not claim to be an expert on that. 

Mr. Scott. Have you anything else to say ? 

Mr. Bielman. There were several things yesterday about the per 
cent of wages. It is not only the additional men.' What we are 
kicking on on our line has been this same business every year since 
the passage of the act—more crews’ money—and while we do not say 
that these extra-men demands are entirely responsible for the big 
increase in our operating costs, we do say that they have something to 
do with it. We feel that the three main factors in steamboat opera¬ 
tion are wages, fuel, and food supply. Food supply and fuel have 
been going up steadily since 1915, and at the present time the wages 
have more than kept pace with it. This is aside from the additional 
men. I have figures here that show that our wage cost averages about 
33J per cent all the way through. In 1919 it was the fuel cost, and 
our company lost much money as well as last year due to our fuel cost. 
During the railroad strike fuel prices went crazy and we paid as 
high as $11.50 for coal. We admit that is a thing that nobody has 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 181 


any control of. But what we do say now is that fuel has come down, 
food supplies have come down, ancl we feel we should be relieved on 
the question of wages and these additional men; just on that would 
save us. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Have your rates come down? 

Mr. Bielman. Our rates have not come down at all, because we have 
not been doing enough business to make money for our stockholders. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Your rates have not come down? 

Mr. Bielman. Our rates have not come down in the last five years. 
Total operating expenses, exclusive of taxes and shore expense in 
1915, wages, fuel, and food supply, cost our company $131,687; in 
1920, $416,590.49. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. What per cent of your operating expense was 
your wage item in that year? 

Mr. Bielman. Just 33J. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. What was it last year? 

Mr. Bielman. Just the same. We have been able to increase our 
revenue 100 per cent, but operation costs have gone up 300 per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. What do you pay for coal now? 

Mr. Bielman. We pay $5.50. It has gone down 100 per cent. We 
will be more than satisfied if we can eliminate these extra men and 
have the wages come down. We will not kick then. 

Mr. Hardy. Will your rates come with them? 

Mr. Bielman. Our rates will come correspondingly. We would be 
only too glad to reduce rates. That is another point when the rate 
question comes up. We are in the excursion business. We are not a 
trunk line, as Mr. Newman’s line from Cleveland to Buffalo, Chi¬ 
cago, and Milwaukee. We are in the excursion business, which is 
the bulk of our business at cheap rates, and we own an excursion 
park. For years we carried people to this park and return for 50 
cents. When the costs started up we raised it to 60 cents; business 
fell off; we raised it to 70 cents, and it fell off more. Then it got up 
to 90 cents, the only way we could pay our expenses, and the business 
has all gone to pieces. We do not do any. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that this year? 

Mr. Bielman. Year before last. It only goes to show that in our 
position, trying to get business from the bulk of the people, from 
poor men’s families, trying to get him to take the children out for a 
picnic and not being in a position to keep the rates low enough to 
get the business, we lose the business. 

Mr. Hardy. When you put it to 90 cents, that family had to pay 
out more money. 

Mr. Briggs. How long is that sort of business ? 

My. Bielman. Since 1896. 

Mr. Briggs. Was it making money each year previous to the oper¬ 
ation of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Bielman. Yes; and made money some years since. 

Mr. Briggs. How many years since? 

Mr. Bielman. It paid a dividend; last year is the first year we did 
not pay dividends. 

Mr. Briggs. It paid them right along up to that time? 

Mr. Bielman. All over a percentage, and the surplus is unfortu¬ 
nately getting smaller each year. We are in Mr. Dustin’s position 


182 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 


and have widows entirely dependent on their income from our stock 
to keep them alive, so we have hoped for the best each year and hope 
to make a little more next year. We have nothing to put into sur¬ 
plus. 

Mr. Briggs. What are the dividends declared? 

Mr. Bielman. The highest dividend the White Star Line ever paid 
was 8 per cent in 1913 and 1914. Since then we have paid 7 and 34 
in 1918. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you had to call on your surplus to get the divi¬ 
dends ? 

Mr. Bielman. No. 

The Chairman. We will hear Capt. F. J. Simpson, marine superin¬ 
tendent, Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co. 

STATEMENT OE CAPT. F. J. SIMPSON, MARINE SUPERINTENDENT, 
DETROIT & CLEVELAND NAVIGATION CO. 

Mr. Simpson. I am an operator. They call me a marine superin¬ 
tendent. I have been master in that line for a great many years. In 
the last years of my service as master I w r as appointed marine super¬ 
intendent; in other words, that is a ship captain looking after the 
operation of ships.* While I did not come here to testify, but only 
to hear what was going on, I did have an interest in this new bill, 
which I think would help us materially. I have listened to the testi- 
mon}^ about steamers, adding crews, and cutting down the seasons, 
and that applies to our steamers. We operate a fleet of eight 
steamers, two between Detroit and Buffalo, the finest of their kind. 
They compare well with Mr. Newman’s steamer—the million and a 
half steamer. Our steamer cost a million and a half, and we have one 
that runs with her, $1,250,000. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the tonnage of this ship? 

Mr. Simpson. The City of Detroit 3d, which is 6,066 tons. 

Mr. Briggs. Dead weight? 

Mr. Simpson. Gross tons. The City of Cleveland runs with her. 
She is somewhat over a 4.000-ton ship. 

Mr. Briggs. What size crews do they carry ? 

Mr. Simpson. The City of Detroit carried a crew last year of 250, 
the City of Cleveland 225. The Eastern States and Western States 
are ships of a little over 3,000 gross tons, which run to Cleveland. 
Their runs are 7 hours and 15 minutes between Detroit and Cleve¬ 
land, and the run to Buffalo is 12 hours, over a 226-mile run. leaving 
Detroit at 6 o’clock every evening and at the other end 6 o’clock in 
Buffalo. Our business consists of passengers and freight. I do not 
imagine you are interested in the class of freight; it is general mer¬ 
chandise—automobiles, tourists, and passengers. We operated two 
other steamers on the Cleveland division that helped out in the busy 
season in summer, an extra steamer each night, 1,900 tons each, in 
eacli direction. Then there were other steamers mentioned here as 
taken off the run. the Mackinac City and the Alpena 2d. Those are 
the steamers mentioned here as taken off the lines. Where it is the 
intention of the company to take them off the run, last December or 
January, they called me in and said: “Those boats have lost money 
last year, and in planning for crews this year you should leave them 
out of the race.” 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 183 

1 lie year before on this Mackinaw division they also told me 
that they had been planning for a schedule, that they lost money, but 
it has been their endeavor to try and make that up instead of run¬ 
ning two trips a week from Detroit to Toledo to Mackinaw and 
leturn; that would be four trips for the two boats. We try to plan 
on a schedule. They had the figures—I do not have them here—to 
eliminate some of the ports that lost the most money, that lost busi¬ 
ness, and we planned a schedule of three trips a week for each steamer, 
making practically daily service, except Sunday, out to Detroit. 

' } ie .Y operated the steamers on that schedule last year from the 15th 
of June to the middle of September, and, as I said, last December 
or January they told me they lost a lot of money. I will say that 
what contributed to that loss, to my knowledge, would be not so much 
the extra crew. They did have an extra crew, not in such large num¬ 
bers as you have heard, in some of the steamers, not the small boats. 
In the larger ones they did have a considerable crew. On the larger 
steamers there is no doubt but what they made some money. I 
know they made money. I do not know that from a technical stand¬ 
point, but I know I got some returns from what little stock I had. 

I would say in support of this new bill that at the passage of the 
original seamen’s act we had the 2-watch system all over our steam¬ 
ers. After the passage of the act we had to put the 3-watch system 
in the engine-room crews, not engineers. I appeared before this 
committee at that time and I stated at that time we did not require 
that, and I still insist we did not require it. We have not had any 
real benefit from that. Of course, the men, instead of working 12 
hours, did work 6 hours. 

That applies to the Mackinaw division, the Cleveland division, and 
the Buffalo division. Going back to the Mackinaw division, of course, 
this bill, if they were running and going to run, they would be 24- 
hour runs, and they would be the 2-watch system in the engine room; 
it would restore the 2-watch system in the engine room, except the 
fire hold, which would be 3-watch system. I would say on these two 
boats they had the 3-watch system when they were built in 1893. 
They were a peculiar type of construction boilers, and the company 
and constructors felt that was the best operation for those two 
steamers. It worked out all right, but on all our other steamers it 
was the 2-watch system, especially on the Cleveland division, where 
the}^ ran 7 hours 15 minutes 3-watch system. 

I would say that the Mackinaw boats last year in the middle of 
the season did not do a good business. We could say that the sea¬ 
men’s law did not have any effect on that boat. I do not see that they 
did on last year’s business, but when I ran on that run for 20 
years myself I never had a Thanksgiving dinner at home in all that 
time. I mean, when we started we started in the early spring, when 
navigation opened, and ran until the 1st of December. I haven’t got 
the dates that the steamers started since the passage of the seamen’s 
act, but they started right out as usual and ran pretty well up to 
Thanksgiving time. It is my impression from the officers that at 
the middle of the season they would make some money and at the 
end of the season, of course, they can not make any. 

The steamers are licensed for about 700 in the. summer, up to the 
15th of September, and after that time the license is for 160 or 162. 


184 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


For instance, they leave Buffalo with one of these boats with 400 or 
350 people, or whatever the case may be, on the 14th or 15th of 
September, and we would unload the freight and turn around at 
Mackinaw, and coming back could only carry up to 160. She put on 
the same business at Mackinaw and releases people all along the 
line. The vessel master can not explain to the public the reason 
for not taking them. They give you the reason, that you got }murs 
and did a big business during the season, and you are satisfied, and 
the public could go to—you know where. The company felt that 
after that period, of course, right up to the end of the season, we 
did not require her full certificate. I would say 160 was not enough 
for probably 10 or 12 ports for each steamer in the fall. In that way 
we are driving them away, and those boats can not make money with 
freight alone. They carry a big load all on deck, classed, as you 
have heard here, as potatoes, vegetables, and grains, and stoves, and 
regular general merchandise. In that way the company has reduced 
the season, and we kept on reducing it until we lost business; that 
is all. I certainly contributed to the seamen’s act. I do not con¬ 
tribute to the number of men they put on, that it was material in 
the laws, because some of the figures that I have heard mentioned are 
quite high. But I do say of the service that we gave the people 
that we gave them just as good service during those summer months 
last year as ever before. We gave them better. But the early 
season was not a paying game, and the late season certainly was not a 
paying game. 

In that way, if these steamers were restored on that route they 
would have the benefit of the 2-watch system, except in the fire hold, 
and another thing would be the extension of the season. It is my 
understanding from hearing the few remarks that Judge Hardy 
made that we possibly could expect restoring this lengthening of the 
season. 

Mr. Hardy. I think that has been agreed on by the former com¬ 
mittee ; not by this committee, however. It was by this committee at 
the last session. 

Mr. Simpson. If the extension of the season was restored, or we 
had any reasonable belief that it would be-—I will not talk on that 
further because it would be unnecessary—that would help us a 
great deal. It would certainly help us an awful lot on the Mackinaw 
division. 

Mr. Hardy. I understand you that your main losses have been 
because of the fact that you can not accommodate the passengers 
that would have come to you if you could have carried on until 
the 15th of October? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes, sir. We could in the Alpena and Mackinaw , but 
have no way of arriving at the loss. There is a great crowd of 
people. You can not explain to them the only reason we went into 
port there was to get Mr. Pepcorn’s fish or somebody else’s potatoes 
or their fruit. It would be better for the master of the ship to go on 
by these people; but we have an advertised schedule and have to go 
in whether we take on anybody or not. 

Mr. Hardy. If there were no law restricting you, would you run to 
the 15th of October? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 185 

Mr. Simpson. I should say, if there was business there to be gotten. 

I he reason we lost the business was we shut the season there and it 
was diverted to other routes by rail, and it is hard to get it back. 

Mr. Hardy. Some of these vessels run only 75 days, not a limitation 
of law but a limitation of business. 

Mr. Simpson. I would say in answer to that, as to those boats I can 
not see any reason why—that there is no reason why they should run 
up to as late as when I was on. 

Mr. Hardy. What date was that ? 

Mr. Simpson. Thanksgiving time, the last of November, starting 
out the 15th of January. 

Mr. Chindblom. That was only the Christopher Columbus , testi¬ 
fied to as 75 days, and it is a particular business between Chicago and 
Milwaukee that runs in the vacation period, when the schools are in 
vacation. 

Mr. Simpson. None of the other boats run like that. 

Mr. Hardy. Some man said he had another vessel that ran about 
four months. 

Mr. Chindblom. Is there any vessel that makes that run now be¬ 
sides the Christopher Columbus? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You said you had another vessel run about four 
months. 

Mr. Thorp. Chicago to Michigan City; about the same time as the 
Christopher Columbus. We have two other boats that run under 
four months. 

Mr. Hardy. You have two that run under four months and two 
that run 75 days? 

Mr. Thorp. And two that operate freight. 

Mr. Scott. In view of this interruption—you have indicated that 
your business has been decreasing—I ask you whether or not the 
fact that in consequence of this law you have been obliged to leave 
passengers on the dock and not be able to carry them after they 
purchase tickets entitling them to go on the boat, that law preventing 
you from carrying them because you had your number on board that 
you were privileged to carry, whether or not that has affected not 
only your passenger but also your freight business ? 

Mr. Simpson. It certainly has, and the business got away from us. 

Mr. Scott. People would go down there with the expectation of 
getting on your ship, and you might have freight with them, and 
when you could not take them abroad would not do any business with 
you and it would take away that business. 

Mr. Simpson. It was our intention that we should have much 
larger and bigger boats on that run, and there is no question the way 
business went while I was there—even at that time there were indica¬ 
tions that you had to have larger boats, and we at the present time 
have been figuring on building two of the finest boats in the world. 

Mr. Scott. And putting them on the northern division ? 

Mr. Simpson. Not only Mackinac run, but other runs; restore 
other boats, too. 

Mr. Scott. The Alpena 2d and the City of Mackinac are never 
boats, larger than the original Alpena and Mackinaw? 


186 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Simpson. Yes; these boats twice, since I have been there, 
were replaced with larger boats. I would say that the Mackinac 
boats are not the only boats that have been turning business away in 
our line. We have had steamers, in fact, almost all of our steamers 
on the Buffalo division and the Cleveland division turn passengers 
away numerous times. Take the City of Detroit 3rd , that was built 
for 4,000 passengers, that crosses the lake in shoal-water service, and 
before the passage of this act, the City of Detroit 3rd was licensed 
for 2,214. After the passage of the act she was licensed for 1,886. 
She could not carry that many. We added quite a lot of equipment. 
I will say, going back to the Mackinac division steamers, by the 
passage of this act, they were not allowed to carry anybody with the 
equipment they had on her. She had to add 100 per cent equip¬ 
ment to operate those boats to carry TOO people under the 50 per 
cent clause, and that is between the middle of May and September. 
As I said before, the Detroit and the Cleveland on the Buffalo 
division have turned people away every year since the passage of 
that act in numerous trips after the 15th of September. There is 
no way of arriving at the number of people you turn away. We 
have turned them away numerous times on that 50 per cent clause 
around the 4th of July and Labor Day and even Saturday nights 
during the season. There is no way of arriving at the real loss,, 
although those boats made some money. They are running between 
two of the greatest cities on the Great Lakes and they certainly are 
making some money. The loss did not put them out of business, but 
it certainly has put the Mackinac division out of business. 

You talk about the able seamen. The City of Detroit 3rd is re¬ 
quired to carry 25 of the able-seamen type. I notice in Mr. Yew- 
man’s statement here that is a different crewing regulation than we 
have worked out, and I wish to thank Judge Hardy for that. I 
appeared before this committee at that time and he brought out, 
to my satisfaction, that we could use able seamen in other depart¬ 
ments. I was reacting over the testimony last night to brighten up 
my mind. He brought that question out and the Judge reached 
an understanding, and said this captain here is under the impres¬ 
sion that he can not use those men in other departments. Well, we 
have used them in other departments. 

Mr. Hardy. I made the same suggestion a moment ago to some¬ 
body on the stand, that they had able seamen, anyway. 

Mr. Simpson. Yes, sir; we have not had trouble with the unions. 
We have not had strikes or interruptions. There was a question 
that came up just under that regulation, that we were using able 
seamen for other departments, and we did really have a tie-up and 
we did have to agree to put on a few men in order to get going. 
Of course, the seamen’s act did not say that: but, in order to get 
going, we had to do that. It is considerably over 40 that we have 
added in our fleet on account of the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Hardy. In the entire fleet or iust one ship? 

Mr. Simpson. The entire fleet. I do not wish to go into the three- 
watch system, because while the act mav have had something to 
do with it, it is not m the act. We put in the three-watch system 
connection. 

Mr. Hardy. How many ships did you have that involved that in¬ 
crease of 40 members ? How many ships in your fleet ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 187 


Mr. Simpson. Eight ships. It runs from 12 on one ship down to 
only 2 on another. 

The impression has been given here—that is, the impression I got— 
that this amendment in the bill for less than eight hours would mean 
that there would be one watch on the boat. We have got a route of 
7 hours 15 minutes. I never would consent for those boats to run on 
one watch. They have got to have two watches, because there is 
work for these men to do while in port, whether running or not. The 
boat would be a nice looking boat if you just had your crew on watch 
when they are running. She has to be taken care of just the same 
as a hotel or place where you live. I would say, too, that I do not 
care what they do with the law. I would never consent to operate 
my boat with seamen whether they gave me the privilege or not. 

Mr. Hardy. You want certificated men? 

Mr. Simpson. I want able seamen, whether it is judged by the local 
board of inspectors or by me. I will say that the seamen we have been 
employing since the passage of the act are the same men as before. 
The} r come aboard with a ticket; that is the only thing different. 
They were the same men. 

Mr. Hardy. In other words, the law just provides a means by 
which the fact can be certified that they are qualified seamen. 

Mr. Simpson. Now, whenever a new man comes with a ticket you 
have to take it for granted he is an able seaman. Before that you 
would not know about it. He would not have any ticket, and I would 
say if this provision were in the amendment that he could use certifi¬ 
cated lifeboat men in lieu of able seamen, that we could use those, 
I would say that the only boats that we would ever care to use those 
would be for the manning of equipment. That is, I would not want 
to take a man that came down there with a certificated lifeboat ticket 
and ship him as a wheelsman: not on your life. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean that the only place you would want to use 
him on is in the manning of one of those life rafts or boats? 

Mr. Simpson. I think we should have the privilege of using him 
there. There are about 15 persons on a life raft. I would say 15 or 
9 or 10, or simply 9. You have 100 persons on our deck and carry 
1,886 passengers and have something like 4,000 life preservers on 
that steamer. All passengers help themselves to life preservers; 
why not let them help themselves to the rafts? If you are going to 
have a disaster on that boat, which I hope we never have, when you 
are getting your passengers off what is to prevent them from helping 
themselves to small rafts? They can not help themselves to the big 
rafts. 

Mr. Briggs. How much of an equipment do you carry on the larger 
vessels; how many boats ? 

Mr. Simpson. On the larger boats we have 20 lifeboats and 26 
life rafts. 

Mr. Briggs. With what capacity of boats? 

Mr. Simpson. The boats average 30 persons and the rafts 25 to 15. 
The reason that we adopted 25 and 15 was on account of the fact that 
we would not have to add men. The 25-person raft increases the able 
seamen and the 15 does not. Two rafts with 15 and 25 makes 40 
people. Our boat holds 30 persons: some able seamen operate those 
two rafts. 


188 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


Mr. Gahn. Are those out-of-season requirements of the old act 
such that you cannot meet that law ? 

Mr. Simpson. On these Mackinaw boats you could not meet that. 
We put 100 on them after the passage of that act. Those boats are 
not in the condition as when I was there. 

Mr. Gahn. It is a question of not having room on the boat ? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes; and a question of not taking care of the watch. 

Mr. Davis. Do you consider three watches too much for these boats 
that make a trip in 7 hours 15 minutes ? 

Mr. Simpson. I certainly do. 

Mr. Davis. Do you consider two watches proper ? 

Mr. Simpson. I would say in answer to that, there are lots of boats 
on a little run of 7 or 8 hours, probably where one watch would be 
enough, but I say on all of our boats, which are passenger boats, they 
must be taken care of, and there is as much to be done at dock as 
when they are running. In the forward department and in the en¬ 
gineers’ department there is a lot of work to be cleaned up and it has 
to look as good as the lobby in the New Willard. Since adding of 
the extra watch, it has not improved any at all. I know that it has 
improved in the forward department. Some of you gentlemen say 
we have been compelled to put them in. Of course, we did have to 
put them in last year. We put them on. But I know that on some 
of our steamers under the two-watch system the year previous, there 
was only one man on one steamer, that she carried two wheelsmen. 
There was only one of these men we had in 1919. and I know there 
were 11 changed on the 3-watch system in 1920. It is a turnover. I 
would not sit here and tell you gentlemen a man would rather work 
12 hours than 8. The same man was a better man when he was work¬ 
ing 6 hours watch. He was not putting in his time at the wheel 
when she was not running. You will hear, too, that 8 hours is a 
proper day’s work for any man ashore, and I certainly would rather 
work 8 than 12. It is a different proposition on a boat on these short 
runs. One man goes on watch and stays 4 hours and another man 
goes on watch and stays 4 hours, and another man goes on watch and 
stays 4 hours. He is not there half an hour before he gets the watch, 
goes out and has his supper and is back on watch to relieve the other 
fellow in the half hour. If he was home he would be away from his 
home, if he worked 8 hours ashore; he would be away from home 12 
hours, have to go 4 or 5 miles to work. He is right there at his 
work. The men were perfectly satisfied under that system. I will 
not say that they would rather work 12 hours instead of 8. 

Mr. Briggs. Is there anything in the seamen’s act that requires 
them to do three watch ? 

Mr. Simpson. Only in the engine-room department. We certainly 
do. The wages for firemen and water tenders run the same as the 
able seamen. Those men in the engine room were always before under 
the two watch and when they got a 3-watch system if was their man 
who gave these people the laugh when he was putting all 4 hours 
there. They legislated for the engineers’ crew and they did not have 
a mess crew. The original legislation when it came up was for three 
watch in the mess crew. I do not know how we defeated it, but they 
did not get away with it. 

Mr. Scott. How long has that company been operating up there? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 189 


Mr. Simpson. I have been with them 32 years. They were there 
before that. 

Mr. Scott. ^ ou were captain on one of the ships that ran up from 
Detroit to Mackinaw for several years? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Prior to the passage of this act, during the 32 years that 
vou were in the service, how many passengers were lost ? How many 
lives were lost ? 

Mr. Simpson. There were not any lost. 

Mr. Scott. You are sure of that? 

Mr. Simpson. I am positive. 

Mr. Scott. How many have you had lost since the adoption of this 
act ? 

Mr. Simpson. We have not lost any. I had a little statement on a 
card of that. 

Mr. Scott. How many passengers have you carried ? 

Mr. Simpson. I have not got the number of passengers that we car¬ 
ried, but I have the number of passengers carried on the Great Lakes. 
I would say, just as I said before, I think the Great Lakes passenger 
steamers travel is the safest mode of travel in the world. In fact, right 
up in Detroit, where they carried this last year over 13,000,000 people, 
I would say there were more lives lost in Detroit and suburbs by 
drowning out of automobiles than there are out of passenger lines— 
people driving off the dock or going into the creek. Before the pas¬ 
sage of the act there were 12,000,000 people carried in the eighth 
district. There were 13,000,000 people carried, total in 1914, and 8 
lives lost. In 1915 there were 16,000,000 carried and 5 lives lost. 

I have a total at the bottom here where we have got seven years here 
in this report, and the inspector says there were 24 lives lost by sui¬ 
cide. That would be three of the five to come off for suicides, which 
would only leave two. So it has.not improved any; that is a cin h. 
They have not lessened the number of lives lost by any means, and I 
can not see any material improvement. I would say that we are not 
going to be bankrupt if we do not go on. But I do say that with some 
of these boats, after listening to this testimony, it is more serious than 
I thought it was. The contributing factor in my mind, the major 
factor, is the business that we turn away that we have had there and 
have lost. For instance, I heard of a case just yesterday where a lady 
and three children came down to catch the boat at Alpena, and came 
in from the country 20 or 30 miles, got down to the dock, and then they 
said, “ We can not take you.” “ Why can not you take me ? ” “ Simply 
because we can not. I have to return about 90 tickets here that we 
had sold. We have a report from the boat that she can not accept any 
more passengers.” 

There is one case I have got confused with several cases cited, 
whether this was the case that they could only take on four. I 
thought the case where the lady was turned back with two children 
they could not taken any more. What about the advertising these 
two little children that have planned on that trip for weeks and 
that mother? They went back to find a hotel in Alpena and it was 
filled up. What did she have to do ? She had to get some kind neigh¬ 
bor to take her in or carry the banner all night 

On a route where we never lost a life in our life, I think it un¬ 
justifiable to give us these restrictions. There is a run that would 


190 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

be one of the greatest in the United States, and there is no reason 
why it should not be. Up through that district you hear these men 
testify that the agriculture and other industries all over are suf¬ 
fering over it. 

Mr. Scott. Under the present regulations your fleet, the D. & C. 
Navigation Co., known as the Mackinaw division, operating these 
two ships, are the only passenger lines that stop at the ports be¬ 
tween Port Huron and Mackinac Island, covering the whole shore, 
the whole Lake Huron shore, a distance of approximately 25 or 30 
miles. Is that correct? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes; our run from Toledo to Mackinaw. 

Mr. Scott. It is the only passenger service by water that we have 
had in years in that section of the country. Is that true ? 

Mr. Simpson. It certainly is. 

Mr. Scott. And now this year, after your experience during the 
past few j^ears, you have notified the people up there, and you 
are determined you will not run your passenger line between Detroit 
and Mackinaw, leaving out Port Huron, Harbor Beach, Oshkosh, 
Ausable, Harrisville, Alpena, Roger City, and Cheboygan. Is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Representing a population of approximately, conserva¬ 
tively, 150,000 people, who have been doing business with your ships 
for the last 35 years ? 

Mr. Simpson. I would like to ask if there is anybody here that 
has ridden on the D. & C. boats and what they think of the service— 
any one of them? Take the Mackinaw division. The menue is the 
same on the Detroit and Cleveland, and second to none in the 
nature of the service on those boats. I have been master there for 
years, and know more about the service there than any other man, 
not barring the general manager or president, because I was right 
in close touch with those boats all the time. When I was coming 
here the other night on the train two gentlemen sat opposite me and 
were talking about meals. One mentioned that the meals were good, 
and in speaking about travel, in the course of their talk it was inter¬ 
esting to me when they mentioned travel between Detroit and Buf¬ 
falo. One of them said, “ Did you ever have a meal on one of those 
boats?” He said, “Yes; I do not know when I enjoyed one more 
than I did on that boat. The boat leaves early in the evening and 
gets to Detroit or Buffalo at 8 or 9 o’clock in the morning. It is 
grand.” 

Mr. Hardy. 'Will not your boats run longer if the season is ex¬ 
tended ? 

Mr. Simpson. I could not assure you on that, Judge; but I should 
say if it is not too late the business is not gotten away. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the trouble you have had? 

Mr. Simpson. Yes. 

The Chairman. We will meet to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock to 
hear the opponents. 

(Thereby the committee adjourned to meet again at 10.30 o’clock 
a. m. Wednesday, May 4, 1921.) 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 191 

Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

W ashing ton, D. G., "Wednesday, May If, 1921. 

The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., pursuant to adjournment, 
Hon. William S. Greene (chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. The committee will please come to order. There 
are one or two more of these parties that want to finish their case. 
When they have finished we will give all the time that is necessary 
to the other side. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, I believe that some member of the 
committee inquired yesterday regarding the ships that have been 
taken off the Lakes on account of the operation of the present naviga¬ 
tion laws, and I do not believe the information has been given yet. 
I will therefore call on Mr. H. W. Thorp, of Chicago, to state the 
names of the ships that have been taken off of the Great Lakes. 

FURTHER STATEMENT OF MR. H. W. THORP, CHICAGO, ILL. 

Mr. Thorp. All that I have, you understand, are the passenger 
ships. 

Mr. Maclean. The passenger ships are what I refer to, not the 
package and packet freight ships. 

Mr. Thorp. I wish the gentleman who sat here might be here to 
get this, because he seemed to think there were only two or three, 
and there are a great many more. 

You were told yesterday, or day before yesterday, of four Put¬ 
in-Bay boats. There was also the Northland, a large steamer. The 
Government took from the Great Lakes the steamship Virginia, which 
has never returned and has never been replaced by any other 
boat. The Government took the steamship Minnesota from the Great 
Lakes. Both of these are large passenger ships, and have never been 
returned, and there is no boat to replace them. 

Mr. Bankhead. Where did those boats operate before they were 
taken over by the Government ? 

Mr. Thorp. The Northland operated between Buffalo and Chicago, 
one trip a week, a round trip a week. You understand this all 
occurred since the seamen’s act went into effect. The steamship Vir¬ 
ginia was owned by the company I represent, and was operated 
between Chicago, Grand Haven, and Muskegon. She has not been 
replaced by another boat; but we have taken one of our fleet to put 
her in place of that boat, reducing our fleet by one in that particular 
instance. 

Mr. Bankhead. Where does the Virginia ply? 

Mr. Thorp. Between Chicago, Grand Haven, and Muskegon, 
Mich. 

Mr. Bankhead. Weekly trips or daily ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; three times weekly; three and a half round 
trips. The steamer Minnesota plied between Chicago, and Buffalo a 
round trip a week, a large passenger steamer handling practically 
nothing outside of passengers, except automobiles; no package 
freight at all. 


192 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


The Virginia was a package freight boat as well as a passenger 
boat and a large ship about 300 feet long and accommodating 300 
people in staterooms. She Avas allowed about a thousand people. 

You were told that the Rochester was transferred to Canadian 
registry on account of the act. That is a loss to the American 
merchant marine, any way. 

The City of South Haven was taken over by the Government. 
She operated between Chicago and South Haven, Mich., during the 
summer months, making a round trip daily, and in the fall and 
spring three round trips a week. I will say that she has been re¬ 
placed by another steamer very late last fall, but only after their 
business had been very badty demoralized, not having had any ade¬ 
quate service for about two years. The steamer that has replaced 
her is a very much smaller steamer. 

The company that I represent has operated from Chicago to 
points north of Milwaukee ever since the law came into existence. 
Previous to the seamen’s act there were times that we had daily serv¬ 
ice and times that we had triweekly service. Now we give no service 
at all except a passenger service during tAvo months in the year. We 
own our own terminals at Cheboygan, Mich., and at Manitowoc, 
Wis. Those terminals represent an investment of over $100,000 that 
are absolutely lying idle, and haA T e laid idle for OA r er one year. 

Mr. Mills. What is the reason for that? 

Mr. Thorp. Because we have discontinued operations north of 
Milwaukee, except for two months in the summer, doing a strictly 
passenger business, carrying no freight whatever. 

Mr. Mills. Why have you discontinued the service ? 

Mr. Thorp. Because of the fact that we could not make any money 
out of it, and the two months we might run in the summer time 
were very little help, and we discontinued our freight business en¬ 
tirely. 

Mr. Mills. And those conditions only began last year ? 

Mr. Thorp. Two years ago we discontinued. We went along just 
as long as Ave could under the conditions we were operating under 
before we gave it up. We lost money before we gave it up. 

Mr. Hardy. Does the Emergency Fleet Corporation operate any 
vessels there ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; none on the Great Lakes at all, and never has. 

Mr. Hardy. There are no Government vessels running there ? 

Mr. Thorp. Not in the freight business; no, sir. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. One of the witnesses spoke yesterday of the city 
of Toledo losing tAvo boats, and two of the D. & C. Line. Was that 
because any boats Avere taken off there, or simply because they cut out 
their stop at Toledo ? 

Mr. Thorp. I can not answer that question entirely, sir, because I 
am not fully familiar with the conditions down there. We operate 
on Lake Michigan alone. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. You are only speaking of Lake Michigan noAv ? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. 

Mr. C. F. Bielman. The D. & C. Line, on their MachinaAv DKision 
last year, as Capt. Vincent told you yesterday, cut out the unprofitable 
points, Toledo being one of the points. 

Mr. Thorp. For many years our company operated a daily line of 
steamers between Chicago, Grand Ha\^en, and Muskegon from early 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 193 


spring to late fall. In the last four years we have cut our service, 
spring and fall, to triweekly service. As I told you yesterday, we 
operate the year round. We are the only steamboat line that has 
appeared before that operates 365 days of the year, and we do operate 
in the winters as well as summers. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did you state what company you were inter¬ 
ested in ? 

Mr. Thorp. The Goodrich Transit Co., of Chicago. 

In addition to the steamers I have mentioned, you already know 
of the City of Alpena and the City of Mackinaw , and I want to say 
this, that it was brought out that there is not any blulf about taking 
those boats off. Those boats were offered to our company and a price 
put on them, and I personally went down with our consulting engineer 
and went through those two steamers with a view to perhaps pur¬ 
chasing them. 

Mr. Scott. What two steamers are they ? 

Mr. Thorp. The City of Alpena and the City of Mackinaw . There 
is no bluff about that. 

Mr. Scott. I know it. You do not have to argue that to me. Were 
you offered the Chippewa? 

- Mr. Thorp. I understand there were negotiations for the sale of 
her. 

Mr. Scott. The Chippewa has operated in my district, and the 
other two ships, too, and I know absolutely that the Chippewa has 
been for sale. 

Mr. Thorp. I had letters from the D. &. C., and I immediately went 
down and inspected those boats with a view to perhaps purchasing 
them. A price has been put on them, and anybody who has the money 
can go there and buy them to-day. That is a fact. 

In addition to the City of Alpena and the City of Mackinaw , if they 
are taken off the Chippewa and the Islander will be taken off. 

Mr. Hardy. Whom do they belong to now ? 

Mr. Thorp. They belong to the Arnold Transit Co., of Mackinaw. 

Mr. Chindblom. Did you investigate the question whether it would 
be profitable for you to run the City of Mackinaw and the City of 
Alpena? 

Mr. Thorp. No; we did not. There were a number of reasons, I 
will say, that we had, possibly. 

Mr. Chindblom. I do not think it is any of our concern, really, why 
they did not buy, execept as your failure to buy may have been occa¬ 
sioned by the prospects of doing business, or the lack of prospects of 
doing a profitable business. 

Mr. Thorp. This was quite early in the year with us, some time 
back. I will say that I was in Detroit more than two months ago— 
nearly three months ago—looking at the books. Our business is not 
what it ought to be at the present time. We are suffering just as other 
businesses of the country are suffering, and we decided, with the 
boats we have, we could reroute them and get along without putting 
more money into steamboat power. That was one of the reasons why 
we did not purchase, but we certainlv went there with sincerity. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Mr. Thorp, you say you operate all the year 
round ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; we do. 

48420—21-13 


194 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Kirkpatrick. Do you meet the out-of-season requirements of 
the shipping act? 

Mr. Thorp. Do we meet them? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Yes. 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; as we have to do. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. One of the witnesses testified yesterday that it 
was impossible to meet those requirements. 

Mr. Thorp. I do not recall in what connection any such testimony 
was given. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. It was in answer to a question of mine. 

Mr. Scott. He said it was impossible to meet the requirements of 
the law and carry the real carrying capacity of the ship. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I understood him to say it was broader than 
that; that he said the weight of the equipment, etc., was so great 
that it could not be carried at all on his boats. 

Mr. Scott. The City of Alpena , we will cite as an illustration. 1 
am more familiar with those boats than I am with the others. The 
City of Alpena is allowed to carry between 700 and 800 passengers 
during the summer season, with the present requirements of the law 
relative to life-saving devices. As I understand, under the law they 
are only given credit for two lifeboats and life rafts. They have to 
carry enough life rafts and lifeboats on the decks of each ship to 
accommodate 100 per cent of the passengers and crew. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I understand what the requirements are. 

Mr. Scott. Now, after the 15th of September, on the 16th of Sep¬ 
tember, that same boat would have to carry life rafts and lifeboats; 
if she wanted to carry 800 passengers, she would have to carry enough 
lifeboats and life rafts to accommodate the entire 800 passengers, 
together with her entire complement, or her entire crew. The gentle¬ 
man who testified yesterday said it was almost an impossibility to 
put the equipment required under the law on that ship so that she 
could operate and carry the 800. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. To carry the same number? 

Mr. Scott. Carry the same number. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. They could cut down the passengers ? 

Mr. Scott. In fact, she is now, during the summer season, with the 
requirements 50 per cent, carrying every pound of life-saving devices 
that she is able to carry of that character. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. What he meant was that it was impossible to 
do it and not cut down the number of passengers ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I see. 

Mr. Thorp. In reducing our service north we last year sold one 
of the steamers taken off that run, the steamer Georgia , which is now 
on a run replacing a boat that was lost a year ago last October ; so 
that it makes one less boat on Lake Michigan—one less passenger 
and freight boat. I think that makes 10 or 11. 

Mr. Hardy. Will you let me ask you this one question: If the 
La Toilette law, so called, requires accommodations, or at least pro¬ 
visions, for the safety of 50 per cent in the summer time and 100 
per cent in the wintertime, how does that law make their winter 
passenger capacity less than 50 per cent of their summer capacity ? 

Mr. Scott. Because it does not take in the crew. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 195 


Mr. Hardy. I understand; but the crew would be a little more in 
the excursion steamers—the crews are larger. Now, as I understand 
it, 50 per cent of the accommodations in the summer time is required? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. And 100 per cent in the wintertime ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Provision for passengers and crew? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. A large part of your crew in the summer time, when 
you have these big excursions, is in the cooking department—or what 
do you call it? 

Mr. Thorp. The culinary department. 

Mr. Hardy. The steward department? 

Mr. Thorp. Y es. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, as you lessen your passengers you lessen your 
steward department, too, do you not? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. So that your crew would be diminished if your pas¬ 
senger list was diminished? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, then, your requirements of 100 per cent in the 
winter and 50 per cent in the summer—I want to know how that cuts 
the 2,800 passenger list down to 400 ? 

Mr. Thorp’. I am prepared to tell it. It has not been brought out 
here, but no one has read that law. To begin with, the number of 
passengers that will be allowed during the summer months is 50 per 
cent of the life-saving equipment, not lifeboat equipment, divided 
two-fifths boats and three-fifths rafts. In the fall of the year it is 
100 per cent—75 per cent boats and 25 per cent rafts—and you will find 
that is where the difference comes in. We get allowance for all that 
we are entitled to under the law, and with the same amount of equip¬ 
ment we are kept away below 50 per cent after the season is over 
because of the way that law operates. 

Mr. Hardy. Well, the reason for requiring more boats in the winter¬ 
time is because the water is cold and it would be dangerous if a man 
got out in it on a raft. 

Mr. THORr. That has been cited as the reason for the law. 

Mr. Scott. You mean by the wintertime from the 16th of Septem¬ 
ber? Those are the requirements after the 16th of September. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, as I understand it, you can carry 75 per cent of 
your life-saving apparatus in the winter in boats and 25 per cent in 
rafts? 

Mr. Thorp. That is the law. 

Mr. Hardy. And you have got to have 100 per cent life-saving 



Mr. Thorp. One hundred per cent life-saving equipment, divided 
75 and 25- 

Mr. Hardy. In the summer? 

Mr. Thorp. Fifty per cent, divided two-fifths and three-fifths. 

Mr. Hardy. So that the calculation is on that basis ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Whatever it works out? 

Mr. Thorp. That is where you get the reduction of the number of 
people. Is that fully answered ? 




196 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. It is fully answered, except it might be illustrated, but 
I do not want to take the time of the committee now for going into it. 

Mr. Thorp. In regard to the number of boats that have been taken 
away, there are the Northland , the Rochester , the four Put-in-Bay 
boats, the City of Alpena , the City of Mackinac , the Chippewa , the 
Islander , and three boats of the Goodrich Transit Co., which, I think, 
makes 11 or 12; and I want to say to you now that all of the passen¬ 
ger boats on the Great Lakes do not amount to 60 boats. That is 
over one-sixth of the number of boats that were in operation at the 
time the seamen’s act went into effect. 

Mr. Mills. Where have they gone ? 

Mr. Thorp. The Northland was scrapped; the -Chippewa\ w T ent 
under Canadian registry; the Virginia , that we owned, has gone to 
the Pacific coast. The Government commandeered her. She has 
since been sold, and is operating from San Pedro to Catalina Islands. 

Mr. Mills. Is it not true that a number of Lake vessels were sold 
during the war, when there was a great demand for shipping, at a 
big price, and transferred to the ocean traffic ? 

Mr. Thorp. Not one passenger boat, not one combined freight and 
passenger boat. I brought that out very strongly here the other day. 
There were four steamboats—four passenger and freight boats—taken 
from the Lakes, and they were commandeered by the Government, 
and we were not given anything like the value of the ships. 

Mr. Mills. And the boats that I have in mind, then, were all 
freight boats? 

Mr. Thorp. Outside of those four — yes, sir; absolutely. You can 
gamble on that. So there is a number equal to one-sixth of the pres¬ 
ent fleet that are no longer on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, the Burroughs Adding Machine 
Co., of the city of Detroit, appointed a delegate to come here to 
tell you how the lack of shipping affects their business. This gentle¬ 
man was prevented from coming, and has forwarded a letter, which, 
with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I will ask the secretary of our 
delegation, Mr. Thomas M. Munger, to read. 

(Mr. Munger thereupon read the letter referred to, as follows:) 

Burroughs Adding Machine Co., 

Detroit , Mich. 

Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

Washington , D. G. 

Gentlemen : We would like to go on record as being heartily in accord with 
any change which can be made in the present seamen’s law which will be of 
benefit to the shippers and receivers of freight in the Great Lakes region. 

1. The act in its present shape will eventually, by reason of the burden of 
unnecessary expense, force the package freight carriers to discontinue operat¬ 
ing. In certain instances package freight service has already been curtailed 
and in other instances has been entirely discontinued. The result of this situa¬ 
tion will be: 

(a) Congestion of traffic on the railroads. 

(h) Increased freight rates. 

2. The tonnage now handled by Lake freighters has grown to enormous pro¬ 
portions. If the boat service is discontinued and this accumulation of freight 
is handed to the rail carriers, it will, under normal business conditions, result 
in overloading the rail carriers. 

We experienced a serious congestion last summer, caused by a strike of rail¬ 
road employees. This congestion was directly responsible for the placing of 
embargoes by the railroads and express companies on shipments out of and into 
Detroit. This* situation seriously embarrassed all shippers in Detroit. In our 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 197 

own particular case the White Star Line and the Detroit & Cleveland Naviga¬ 
tion Co., on shipments destined south and east, and the Great Lakes Transit 
Co. and the Michigan Transit Co., on shipments destined west and northwest, 
proved our salvation. Without them we would have been unable to move our 
product, except when the rail carriers signified their willingness to accept it. 

If the Lake freighters discontinue business and a similar condition of con¬ 
gestion arises with the rail carriers (and it is not at all unlikely in view of 
the present attitude of railroad labor), we and the other shippers of this section 
would be in a sad situation. 

3. Water competition is an important factor in the construction of all-rail 
fre ght rates. The present all-rail freight rates to points in the States bordering 
upon the Great Lakes, and in some cases to points at a considerable distance 
from the Great Lakes, are influenced by the fact that the boat lines are com- 
pettive with the rail lines. It necessarily follows that if water competition is 
withdrawn, there is no incentive for the rail lines to expedite shipments, and 
little, if any, argument to oppose the increasing of all-rail rates over the bases 
in effect when water competition obtained. If the Lake carriers are forced 
out of business, it means an increase in freight rates from Detroit to Chicago, 
Milwaukee, Duluth, St. Paul, Minneapolis. Cleveland, Buffalo, and eventually 
the whole Atlantic seaboard. 

Aside from the manner in which the question interests us individually, it is 
a matter of national interest. It not only affects Detroit and immediate vicinity 
but it affects the whole country as far W T est as the Missouri River for the reason 
that the transportation charges as far West as the Missouri River are based in 
many instances upon competition with the Lake lines. 

R. E. Johnson, Traffic Manager. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Chairman, I wish to say that the testimony of 
the Burroughs Adding Machine Co., which is one of the largest 
shippers in the world, is the testimony of all the shippers of Detroit, 
and all the boards of commerce. 

Mr. Chairman,- we have other witnesses present, but I believe you 
have received probably all the information you desire. If so, I 
desire to thank you, Mr. Chairman and the committee, for your very 
great courtesy in listening to pur testimony. We represent anywhere 
from 25,000,000 to 30,000,000 people of this country. We represent 
the great country lying along the Great Lakes from New York to 
Minnesota, and all that great country back of those States. The 
testimony you have heard is the testimony of the great Chicago Asso¬ 
ciation of Commerce, the largest board of commerce in America; of 
the Detroit Board of Commerce, the second largest board of com¬ 
merce in America; the testimony of the great Cleveland Chamber of 
Commerce; the Toledo Chamber of Commerce; and of all these great 
chambers of commerce along the Great Lakes. We have given you 
this testimony without any regard to order. We came here unorgan¬ 
ized, and I called on the witnesses, as I believed they were ready to 
address you. 

If there is any further information that you desire, a letter ad¬ 
dressed to me at Detroit, Mich., will give you the information that 
you want. 

We feel that an emergency exists in our country, and we are looking 
to you to give us legislation that will enable us to get these ships back 
on the Great Lakes and to get additional ships.. If every passenger 
ship and every packet freight ship now in existence on the Great 
Lakes were in commission, we would not have half the water trans¬ 
portation that we need. If these vessel men can not run their ships 
profitably under present existing laws, then we must have other 
laws. Eaiowing a number of these vessel men as I do, as a citizen 


198 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

of Detroit I would be perfectly willing for them to run their ships 
without any legislative enactment, because they are honorable men, 
with immense investments, and they have no desire nor incentive to 
run ships in danger. 

You have heard that we have lost no passengers through the opera¬ 
tion of the Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co., which runs out from 
our city of Detroit. Hundreds of men are killed every year on the 
railroads, and yet we hear of no legislation looking to safety on the 
railroads; that is, not to any great extent. 

Gentlemen, we leave our case with you, feeling that you will weigh 
carefully the testimony of these men from the great Northwest 
and that you will give us the legislation which we ask for, which is 
the bill introduced by the Hon. Frank D. Scott, a member of Congress 
from the State of Michigan. I thank you. 

Mr. Bankhead. I want to ask the gentleman just one question in 
connection with the last statement he made, that Congress seems 
to have been in a measure indifferent—at least that is the con¬ 
clusion I reached from his statement—in reference to safety ap¬ 
pliances and hours of labor and the protection of employees and the 
public on the railroads. The gentleman did not make that statement 
advisedly, did he? 

Mr. Maclean. I will answer that statement by saying in Detroit we 
have heard more about safety at sea than we have about safety on the 
railroads. Now, what action the Congress of the United States has 
taken looking toward safety on the railroads I do not know. 

Mr. Bankhead. I rather assumed that from the gentleman’s state¬ 
ment. 

Mr. Maclean. I know we have many accidents on the rails, and we 
have practically none on the water. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask Mr. Thorp a question. Did you hear 
the statement of Capt. Stimpson here yesterday ? 

Mr. Thorp. I was here a part of the time during which he testified, 
but not all of the time. 

Mr. Briggs. You heard Capt. Stimpson, did you, make the state¬ 
ment that the question of these extra men on watch was of small con¬ 
sequence, as compared with the disturbance, or, rather, the limitation 
on the time of the season ? 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Briggs, he said aS far as these ships are concerned. 
They are very large freight-carrying ships. 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; he was testifying with reference to the operation 
of his vessels, and that is what 1 wanted to ask Mr. Thorp about. I 
Avas going to ask what he had to say Avith reference to that matter, so 
far as his ships were concerned. 

Mr. Thorp. The increase in the creAV is of considerable more im- 
portance to us than the length of the season. We happen to be on the 
other side of the fence, I think. 

Mr. Briggs. To what extent have your losses thus far been attribut¬ 
able to the crew? Have your losses been running behind more than 
the amount of pay for the service for these extra men ? 

Mr. Thorp. I have tried ever since I have been on my feet to-day 
that there are things in the bill that you people can not see, that we 
are up against, and that we have been compelled to employ men for 
longer seasons than we had use for them; and many other things that 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 199 

have gone into the cost of operation of the vessels, that the increased 
number of men have had nothing to do with. 

Mr. Briggs. Tou mean outside of the present law, but you claim 
the present law is responsible for them ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; that is it. 

Mr. Briggs. That is all. 

Mr. Thorp. I want to say again that I am firmly convinced, more so 
than ever, that it is a labor-union proposition. If it were not a labor- 
union proposition why would these labor men be here? If it is a 
safety-at-sea proposition that is up here, is not this committee compe¬ 
tent to say whether we are carrying enough equipment or not, or 
what we must do? 

Mr. Hardy. You do not mean to say that this committee ought to 
hear only from the shipowners and not from the employees? 

Mr. Thorp. No; but it is very evident that it is a labor-union 
measure. 

Mr. Hardy. You men have been as numerous in attendance as the 
labor people. 

Mr. Thorp. We have been very vitally interested. It has been 
putting us out of business. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you not think they might be somewhat interested, 
too? 

Mr. Thorp. They evidently are, and that is just what we claim. 

Mr. Hardy. You are both interested, are you not? 

Mr. Thorp. Very much interested. 

Mr. Hardy. The committee should hear both side of the question, 
should it not? 

Mr. Thorp. I would be very glad to hear their side. I am here 
for that purpose. 

Mr. Chindblom. Is there anybody here representing safety at sea ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; there has not been one. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. Perhaps this committee might be considered to 
represent that side of it. 

Mr. Thorp. That is what I think. I think this committee is com¬ 
petent to handle that question. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. We represent the safety-at-sea proposition, you 
represent the shipowners, and these men represent the men em¬ 
ployed in the ships, so that everybody is represented. 

Mr. Scott. Not quite; that is the unfortunate thing. You are for¬ 
getting the people Avho are most vitally interested in connection with 
the whole thing, and I class myself as one of them. I never owned 
an interest in a ship in my life, except a rowboat. But you are for¬ 
getting such men as Mr. Collins, Mr. Piepkorn, and Mr. Fletcher, 
who were here to represent the boards of commerce and to tell you 
that 25,000,000 or 35,000,000 people who are consumers are the people 
who are vitally interested in the provisions of that law. I would 
add that to your statement. 

Mr. Rosenbloom. And with another statement that this commit¬ 
tee, in my opinion, must represent all the people who are not here— 
having a special interest. The people that have come here and pay 
their expenses are people having a special interest. Our expenses 
are paid here by the people you are talking about—out of their 
funds that are collected from them. 


200 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Scott. I am going to ask the permission of the committee to 
put in the testimony of a couple of farmers, who did not have the 
money to keep coming down here. Their testimony was heard last 
time; and, I think, it is vitally important that this committee should 
know it. You realize that there are many people up in that sec¬ 
tion of the country who can not afford to come away down to Wash¬ 
ington. It costs them $150 or $200 to come down here and stay; 
but we have obtained a portion of their testimony, which is typical 
of the balance of the testimony that would be elicited were they here, 
and I want to ask the permission of the committee to insert, as a part 
of these hearings, the testimony of Mr. Rudolph Dulgent, of Roger 
City, that was taken before the Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries of the House on May 19, 1920. 

Mr. Hardy. Why not ask for a reprint of all of that hearing, and 
let it be considered as a part of this hearing? 

Mr. Scott. That would be all right. Judge Hardy. 

Mr. Hardy. Both sides should be given the same privilege. 

Mr. Scott. May I say this to you, that nearly every one of the 
representatives of labor, Mr. Conway, Mr. O’Brien, and Mr. Furu- 
seth, every one of those gentlemen, is here and has been here during 
this hearing. They are here to-day, and their testimony is carried 
at length in this last year’s hearing. Also the testimony of Mr. 
Thorp, and the other gentlemen, who represented the ship oper¬ 
ators, is carried in the testimony of last year. But here are some 
farmers from my neck of the woods, who are not here to-day, and 
their testimony is, as I said, exactly the same to-day as it was a 
year ago. 

Mr. Hardy. It is along the line that we have already gotten in the 
testimony of the witnesses here for this testimony, is it not? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. That is my recollection. 

Mr. Scott. Only I trust that you remember probably that these 
gentlemen went into details—showing the amount of farm pro¬ 
duce— 

Mr. Hardy. I have no objection to adding it to the hearing. 

Mr. Gahn. I want to correct Mr. Rosenbloom in one regard, or, 
rather, fry to put him right on this question. I think all members 
of the committee are interested in seeing safety on the seas and on 
the Great Lakes, but I would like to call his attention to the fact 
that we Congressmen from the Great Lakes, representing the peo¬ 
ple, too, in that section, and we feel that this seamen’s bill is too 
stringent for the Great Lakes; that there is no need of any such 
stringent law y s applying to the Great Lakes for the benefit of the 
safety of the people that use the Great Lakes, and, I think, Mr. 
MacLean’s point was that, so far as the Great Lakes are concerned, 
we need more legislation on the rail end of it than we do on the 
boat end of it; not that he meant that there was no legislation for 
the railroads or the rail end of it, but, comparatively, the Great 
Lakes need very little legislation for the sake of protection. 

Mr. Chindblom. Mr. Chairman, I raised the question about the 
testimony here with reference to safety at sea. I would like to inquire 
whether there is any technical or expert evidence on that which can be 
obtained ? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 201 

Mr. Scott. Of course, Mr. Chindblom, you are a lawyer—and a 
good lawyer, I assume, from what I have seen of you since you have 
been down here; and I do not say that to compliment you, because I 
think you. are entitled to it—but there is one thing elemental in law, 
and that is that you can not prove that a thing does not exist. You can 
prove its existence, but you can not prove its nonexistence. 

Ever since I was born 1 have lived on the Great Lakes all my life, 
and I have been on every one of the passenger ships that have been 
mentioned here to-day personally. I am now nearly 43 years old, 
and I have never known of a life to be lost since I have been on the 
Great Lakes in connection with the passenger-service operation. I 
have been in the biggest storms they have had during that time. I 
sailed continuously for four years. I was in the famous Galveston 
storm, on board a passenger ship, operating then with all the life¬ 
saving devices that were required by this law and that were put on 
the ships in accordance with the provisions and regulations of the 
Department of Commerce. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did you happen to get overboard in the storm ? 

Mr. Scott. No ; but sometimes I wish I had been overboard, because 
it would have been much easier than it was trying to hang on to the 
ship. 

Mr. Chindblom. Mr. Chairman, my point is this: If there was no 
necessity for the stringent provisions of this law upon the Great 
Lakes for the safety of passengers traveling upon these boats, that, 
of course, is an element, and an important element, in consideration 
of the question whether we should relieve the business interests and 
the shipping interests on the Great Lakes of the hardships which are 
imposed upon them by this legislation; and the testimony that there 
has been practically no loss of life upon the Great Lakes goes far 
toward establishing the proposition that these regulations may not 
be necessary for safety at sea. However, if that could be supple¬ 
mented by any kind of expert or technical information, I think it 
would be valuable to the committee. 

Mr. Davis. We might have a representative of the Department of 
Commerce. 

Mr. Chindblom. Yes; let us hear from the Department of Com¬ 
merce. I think perhaps we are digressing right at this moment, 
except that there seemed to be a moment in the hearings when we 
were trying to map out the general situation here with reference to 
the testimony that is offered. 

Mr. Scott. May I suggest this—and I do not want to impose my 
thoughts upon the committee, but in view of the fact that I have 
introduced this bill, and have introduced it every year since I have 
been in Congress, I rather feel in the position of being compelled to 
state my position. 

This law was put on the statute books for some apparent reason. 
Now, I have not any question of doubt in my mind but what Congress 
was convinced that some remedial legislation was essential, and I do 
not mean to now question the accuracy of their judgment. That 
legislation was put on the statute books, and I have assiduously en¬ 
deavored in my presentation of the amendment to be fair to everyone 
concerned. I have not gone to the extreme of asking that all life¬ 
saving devices be taken off, or that the character of life-saving devices 


202 AMENDING SECTIONS 1 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 


to be carried in the future on the Great Lakes shall be determined 
by the Department of Commerce. I have, in a large measure, left in 
my bill the determination of that feature to the Congress of the 
United States, in view of the fact that you saw fit, about the time of 
the adoption of the La Follette Seamen’s Act, to by legislation deter¬ 
mine the character of life-saving appliances that should be carried. I 
have refrained from carrying that feature in my bill. 

Mr. Davis. I do not think any member of the committee questions 
your good faith, but I think this whole argument arose out of the 
question as to whether the other side of the proposition—not merely 
one provision of the bill—should be heard. But what is to prevent 
us from proceeding with the hearing? 

Mr. Briggs. I would like to ask, in connection with that thing, 
Mr. Chairman, if Mr. Scott has not already done so, that he indicate 
clearly for the benefit of the members of the committee just what 
changes have been made in this bill from the existing law. There 
are quite a few new members, and this bill is quite complicated. 

Mr. Davis. If you will permit a suggestion to Mr. Briggs and the 
other members of the committee, there are a large number of wit¬ 
nesses here from a distance. We are going to be here all the time. 
Let us conclude the hearings, and then when we go into executive 
session we can discuss the different provisions of the bill and hear 
any explanation that Mr. Scott wants to make. 

The Chairman. I think that would be sufficient. 

Mr. Briggs. But it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that the testimony 
would be very much more intelligible if Mr. Scott would just make a 
brief statement of what changes his bill makes. 

Mr. Jefferis. Has this equipment for life saving been utilized to 
any extent? 

Mr. Scott. Of course, you understand that under the regulations 
promulgated by the Department of Commerce it is essential that the 
ship operators conduct their life-saving exercises so many times 
during a trip, so that to that extent all the life-saving appliances have 
been used; but as far as being used in an emergency is concerned, 
for the actual saving of life, they never have been on any of the pas¬ 
senger ships for the last 35 years. 

Mr. Jefferis. I have in mind whether they just carried it or 
whether- 

Mr. Briggs. All I wanted was a succinct statement from Mr. Scott 
as to what were the actual proposed changes in this measure, if you 
can make it. 

Mr. Scott. Then, if I may have the attention of the committee, 
in the first place the present seamen’s law was enacted in 1915 and 
became operative in 1915, but was presented to Congress in 1913. 
That law makes no distinction between the operation of ships on the 
Great Lakes and on the ocean. In other words, it is a uniform navi¬ 
gation law, applicable to all navigation except those engaged entirely 
in rivers, harbors, or sounds. You gentlemen are all familiar with 
the exception. As far as the Great Lakes are concerned, an infini¬ 
tesimal portion of the shipping comes within the exception. 

Now, we found early on the Great Lakes that the application of this 
law to our navigation was incompatible with navigation. We at¬ 
tempted to comply with the law as interpreted by the Department 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 203 


of Commerce, and we have continued to endeavor, with the result, 
as has been shown, of the elimination of a very large part of our 
passenger and package freight transportation facilities. 

I introduced this bill, and my first section meets one of the several 
vital things which resulted in the very large diminishment of our 
shipping facilities. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean section 2. 

Mr. Scott. In my section 2, yes. In that section I allow the sail¬ 
ors, oilers, and water tenders, while at sea, to be divided, on runs of 
16 hours or more, into at least two watches, and the firemen into at 
least three, for any vessel. 

Mr. Briggs. That provision right there does not provide for two 
watches where the run is less than 16 hours? 

Mr. Scott. No ; the proviso does; that where the run is 8 hours and 
less than 16 hours, the sailors, oilers, water tenders, and firemen shall 
be divided into at least two watches, and where the run is less than 
eight hours I make no provision. 

Now, I presume that you will indulge me just a moment. I may 
take more than three minutes, but I hope at least that it will serve 
the purpose of making my view clear to the committee. 

We have hundreds of small ships operating on the Great Lakes 
where the entire run during 24 hours is less than 8 hours, and in 
many instances it is 4 hours, and you have heard the testimony here 
where it is an hour and a half. 

May I illustrate that? I illustrated it yesterday, but I notice 
there are a few new members here this morning who were not here 
then. Mackinaw Island is in my district. It is a very large summer 
resort. Thousands of people go over there in the summer, and they 
have magnificent homes. They have to go from the mainland either 
at St. Ignace or Mackinaw City over to the island. From St. Ignace 
the run is 3 miles and from Mackinaw City it is 6 miles. It takes 
approximately/36 minutes to go from Mackinaw City and approxi¬ 
mately 13 minutes to go from St. Ignace. The St. Ignace boat is a 
ship that has been running up there about 40 years and has never 
lost a life and never had an injury. It is owned by the captain and 
the engineer. The first trip leaves at 9.30 in the morning, and the 
reason it leaves at that time is because the trains from the north 
and south, coming from Duluth and the great West, and from De¬ 
troit, Chicago, Toledo, and the southern points, arrive at Sj:. Ignace 
at approximately 9.30, and there is no occasion for that ship to leave, 
going to the islands, until those trains get in. Now, the last train 
is in at 4 o’clock in the afternoon. There is no train after that from 
either direction, and therefore there is no occasion for that ship to 
travel, so that her entire traveling is from 9.30 in the morning—she 
has to load her cargo, and I think she leaves about 10—and her last 
trip is at 4 o’clock in the afternoon back to St. Ignace, so her entire 
trip during the day is not to exceed seven hours. 

Prior to the passage of this law that ship for some 25, 30, or 40 
years had been operating during the light season with a crew of 
five, and during the heavy season with a crew of seven, and by the 
crew I mean the captain, the wheelman, the engineer, the fireman, the 
deckhand, and purser. When this law went into effect that little 
boat, which had been the means of support and livelihood of that 


204 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

captain and engineer, was obliged to put on 19 men. They could not 
do it. They absolutely tied up at the dock and remained there 
almost during one entire summer, while I was trying to get the 
Department of Commerce to determine that the Straits of Mackinaw 
came within the provisions and the perview of this law, either as a 
sound or as a river, under the definition of the dictionary that a 
river is a small body of water connecting two great bodies and a 
strait is a greater body of water connecting two great lakes. I never 
could get that decision and the ship laid at the dock. Finally, by 
some circuituous route, I obtained a decision from the department 
saying they could carry 10, and they have been carrying ten, at a 
very great loss. I do not know what the situation will be this sum¬ 
mer ; I do not know whether they will run. 

I have illustrated what I mean by allowing smaller ships. There 
are a great many ships that are doing that, and yet that ship, under 
the provisions of this law, was obliged to carry a full freight crew, 
and I insist that is unfair. 

Mr. Bankhead. How will section 2 correct that situation ? 

Mr. Scott. Tt allows them to do exactly as they did before, and 
not only that but under the provisions of the bill, as has been sug¬ 
gested, it unfortunately has developed into class legislation, and now 
this boat can not leave the dock unless it has a crew of union men. 
You might say, “Why can it not?” Because he can not get any 
stuff on his ship. The fellows on the dock will not load his boat, and 
it he does get it loaded when he gets over to the other dock they will 
not unload it. Heretofore the engineer’s boy has worked on the ship. 
His father owned an interest, and a large part of the season was 
during his vacation, when he was not at school, so he worked on the 
boat. The captain’s boy worked on the boat. Now they can not work 
on the boat. 

Mr. Perlman. How old were those boys? 

Mr. Scott. They were young kids. But these boys coming up— 
and they all have families, you know, and some of them very large 
' families— it is the old Indian story, the poor man has more children 
than judgment, and I do not sav that in a spirit of humor, but it is 
actually that a poor man usually has a very large family, and his 
family, as soon as they get old enough to help him, they help him 
support the balance of the family. This happens to be true in the 
particular case I have cited. 

Now, in section 13, which is subsection 3, I change that provision 
there and allow them to use certificated lifeboat men in lieu of able 
seamen. Now, there is not on the Great Lakes, as war stated by Capt. 
Stimpson—and I am sure you gentlemen must have been impressed 
with his forcefulness—the same men who are working on those pas¬ 
senger ships to-day were working on the passenger ships before this 
law went into effect. They were exactly the same able seamen. 
They were not classified as able seamen in those days, but they were 
accepted in consequence of their ability and not in consequence of 
their carrying a blue card. 

Mr. Hardy. At that time we had no definition of what was an able 
seaman. 

Mr. Scott. As I say, there was no classification except the classifi¬ 
cation of qualification. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 205 

Mr. Hardy. And that was not a legal classification at all? 

ill. Scott. No ; blit it was the basis upon which a prudent business 
man selected and employed his employees to work upon the ship that 
he had spent thousands of dollars to build, and he did not care to risk 
that property in the hands of an incompetent person. 

Mr* Hardy. Without any definition by law? 

Mr. Scott. YY ithout any definition by law. And incidentally, in 
that provision, as was stated here yesterday, under the presentlaw, 
to comply with the requirements of the 65 per cent provision as to the 
deck crew, it requires passenger vessels to carry a number of men in 
excess of the actual requirements of the law, because of the safety 
appliances. It necessitates an able seaman on each lifeboat and on 
each liferaft. That brings up the percentage, so in one case, as was 
shown yesterday, this one company is employing something like 22 
men—this one company is employing 22 more men than they really 
require. 

They have absolutely no use for them, but under the provisions of 
this law they are obliged to carry them in order that, in the event of 
an accident, they may be there to sit on that life raft with the pas¬ 
sengers or fill up one of the lifeboats. 

Mr. Briggs. What case is that you are referring to ? 

Mr. Scott. The one that Capt. Stimpson spoke of. 

Mr. Briggs. I thought he said he utilized those in other ways. 

Mr. Scott. He said that he used them during last year, in answer 
to a very fortunate statement Judge Hardy made. In view of the 
fact that Judge Hardy had made a statement it was not controverted. 
They did not dispute it afterwards, so that they did use them. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not think there ever was any dispute on that. 

Mr. Scott. There evidently had been up to the time you made that 
statement. 

Now, as far as my section 4 is concerned, that only carries out the 
provisions of the previous section and extends the season. That pro¬ 
vision, I might say, gentlemen, was the particular provision that was 
reported by this committee during the last session of Congress and 
was unanimously passed by the House and went into the Senate. I 
assume you do not care to have me discuss that. 

Section 5 is largely a corrective section, in order that the legislation 
will be uniform, and that the certificated boatmen may be utilized on 
the small type of ship instead of the able seamen. 

In that connection, under the present law this anomalous situation 
is presented. We are required on the Great Lakes to carry a certain 
quantity of life-saving devices. We are permitted under the law, if 
not compelled, to carry certificated lifeboat men, men whose qualifica¬ 
tions to operate a lifeboat must be determined in advance by an in¬ 
spector under the direction and supervision of the Department of 
Commerce, to determine whether that certificated lifeboat man is 
able to handle a lifeboat in the event of a disaster. And yet, under the 
further provisions of the bill, we are not permitted to put that certifi¬ 
cated lifeboat man on a life raft or on a lifeboat in charge of the boat, 
but must have it in charge of an able seaman or an officer of the ship. 
I say that is an anomalous position. 

In section 5 I have attempted to correct that and allowed the utiliza¬ 
tion of the men whom Congress has seen fit to call certificated life- 


206 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

boat men and whose qualifications are determined under the regula¬ 
tions of the Department of Commerce. 

Does that cover the matter sufficiently? If there is anything you 
would like to ask, I would be very glad to answer it. 

Mr. Briggs. I think so. 

The Chairman. The proponents of the bill have concluded all they 
desire to say. Now, we will hear from the opponents of the bill. 

STATEMENT OF MR. PATRICK O BRIEN. 

The Chairman. Give your name and occupation. 

Mr. O’Brien. Patrick O’Brien, seaman and sailor. 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, a question was asked a moment ago as 
to whether there was anybody here representing the people who were 
on the ships that might be drowned—not in those words, but that was 
the substance of the question. I am one of the men who expects to 
be at sea, and I think that my life is of a little value to myself, at 
least, if it is not to anybody else, and I am going to be asked, if this 
bill goes into effect, to accept no life-saving appliance at all with the 
exception of a life preserver. 

It is all right to tell you, as it has been said here, that the condi¬ 
tions on. the Lakes are exactly alike in the fall, in the spring, and 
in the summer, but that is not so, because the conditions are not alike. 
In the fall and in the spring the water is extremely cold. If you 
have to go overboard with a preserver on you, it would be much bet¬ 
ter if you shot yourself before you went overboard, because you 
would die in the same manner as the victims of the Titanic did when 
they ran into the iceberg. So much for that. 

Mr. Chindblom. Before you leave that, you are speaking of the 
spring and fall. The extension of the time here does not include the 
whole of the spring nor the whole of the fall. What is the extension, 
to be exact? 

Mr. Scott. Fifteen days in the spring and 30 days in the fall. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is from May 1 to May 15 in the spring and 
September 15 to October 15 in the fall, is it not? 

Mr. Scott. Before you answer that, permit me to say this: I would 
be glad to have the witness testify as to the whole situation, because 
before the bill goes in I intend to ask the committee to amend the 
bill by extending the time a portion into the month of November. 
In my bill I only asked that it be extended until the 15th of October, 
but I am going to ask the committee to extend it a longer time. 

Mr. Chindblom. How much longer? 

Mr. Scott. Well, I will ask you to extend it to November 30, so I 
would be very glad to have his testimony in regard to that. 

Mr. Mills. That is practically the close of navigation ? 

Mr. Scott. No; the close of navigation up in that country is about 
the 15th of December. 

Mr. O’Brien. The 5th. 

Mr. Scott. No; it is not the 5th of December, because they give 
insurance until the 5th without an increase, and then from the 10th 
there is an increase, and then from the 10 to the 15th a larger in¬ 
crease, and from there on they do not allow you any insurance at all 
up to the month of April. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 207 

Mr. Gahn. Do you intend also, Mr. Scott, to ask for an extension 
of the spring opening ? 

Mr. Scott. Well, I think it ought to be made. It is now from May 
1. Of course, frankly, I think it ought to be earlier than that, but, as 
1 say, I have atempted to be- 

Mr. Jefferis. At the present time it is from May 1 to October 15? 

Mr. Scott. That does not get our early shipping on the Great 
Lakes, but I would be perfectly willing to accept the judgment of this 
committee on that proposition, although I would like to utilize the 
natural navigation season that we have up there, and, therefore, I 
would be glad to hear the witness’s statement on the whole proposition. 

Mr. Jefferis. The natural navigation begins on April 15? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; on April 15 our natural navigation opens. By 
that I mean, you understand, that for many weeks prior to that time 
the Great Lakes are open, but navigation is not available because the 
rivers which connect the Great Lakes, and the streams incident to 
them, are very frequently frozen over, and they are the last avenues 
that open up, and therefore we can not- 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask this, whether in the proposed bill 
you intend to ask for an extension of the time from September 15 to 
October 15? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Cfiindblom. Let me ask this before we go any further. What 
is the insurance period, Mr. Scott, during which no excess premium 
is required? 

Mr. Scott. From April 15 to December 5. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to pursue this a little further there, if I 
may. What is the reason for objection to the extension from Sep¬ 
tember 15 to October 15? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because of the conditions that prevail on the Lakes 
during this time. 

Mr. Mills. Do you contend that the conditions are materially 
different between September 15 and October 15 ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I certainly do, sir. 

Mr. Jefferis. In what way ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the atmosphere, the temperature of the water, the 
weather itself, and, if necessary, it is very easy to point the actual 
conditions as to the temperature and the water. 

Mr. Mills. Have you ever had to use these appliances from Sep¬ 
tember 15, or along during that time, or not? 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, I have used boats, yes; and I have been on the 
lake in boats. 

Mr. Mills. I mean where you had to escape from a boat to preserve 
life or anything of that kind, or are the boats sufficiently strong them¬ 
selves ? 

Mr. O’Brien. To give you an idea of the ground that I am talking 
about— Saginaw Bay. Saginaw Bay is known as the graveyard of 
the Lakes. 

Mr. Mills. Well, is it? 

Mr. O’Brien. It is. 

Mr. Mills. Have there been any accidents there? 

Mr. O’Brien. Last summer in June, when there are supposed to be 
no storms at all, a barge went down. There were not any passengers 


208 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’S ACT. 

on her, but they were all seamen, all sailors, not certificated lifeboat 
men, but sailors, able seamen. Those men were able to put their boat 
over and get away in the boat. It was a very difficult undertaking 
because of the weather—the sea. 

Mr. Scott. What was the name of that boat, do you remember ? 

Mr. O’Brien. It was Mr. Blodgett’s barge and the steamer Bradley , 
but the steamer Bradley managed to get into port. 

Mr. Scott. Both of them were old boats, and one of them was a sort 
of tow barge, towed on behind ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The point is this, that there was a storm. 

Mr. Mills. That was in June? 

Mr. O’Brien. In June. 

Mr. Mills. Is there anything to show that more boats have been 
lost in the first two weeks in October than the first two weeks in 
September ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you that offhand. 

Mr. Mills. But you contend that the weather is worse in the first 
of the- 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course it is. It starts to snow. We have snow in 
that region almost up until June. I have seen snow on the lake of 
Ontario in June. 

Mr. Gahn. Is it not true that those boats were in a collision on 
Saginaw Bay in June, rather than a storm? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. Is it not true that an investigation of that matter is 
now going on ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There is an investigation going on because of the fact 
that they had taken the crew off. 

Navigation usually opens about the 25th or 26th of April for the 
freight boats. I have left Buffalo on the 27th day of April and 
about the 3d of May was endeavoring to force my way through the 
ice in St. Mary’s River and on to Lake Superior. 

Mr. Scott. You left Buffalo on what date? 

Mr. O’Brien. On the 22d day of April, and about the 2d of May 
was trying to force my way through the ice in Lake Superior, and 
through the river connecting that lake with Lake Huron, which is 
quite close to Saginaw Bay. The water coming from the ice in May 
is not very warm, and if you are going to give to the passengers— 
never mind the crew; they are not supposed to be considered—but the 
passengers, the people whom nobody is supposed to represent—we 
are trying to represent them; we, the men who are here representing 
the men who sent us here, the men who have no voice excepting the 
voice that we are trying to give here—if those people are going to 
be condemned to the fate of jumping overboard into Lake Huron in 
May, why is it that the excursion ships do not take advantage of the 
opportunity to run their ships on the 15th day of May, but wait now 
until Decoration Day to start ? 

Why do they not take advantage of the time they have to-day, if 
the vast bulk of the people are trying to travel on those ships ? They 
have up to the 15th of September, but they close on Labor Day. not 
because the law says so. The vast majority of the excursion boats 
do that, and they start out running on the 31st day of May, and not 
on the 15th day of May. The water is too cold, and the people do 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 209 

not go bathing at all until the water gets warm, and that is not until 
the middle of June down on Lake Erie, or the 1st of July, that the 
water is sufficiently warm for them to go bathing. Never mind after 
it has passed through Lake Huron into Lake Erie. The water is 
much colder on Lake Huron than it is on Lake Erie, because of the 
tact that you get the water from Lake Superior first, and it has an 
opportunity to warm up as it travels from Lake Superior to Lake 
Huron and Lake St. Clair, through the rivers into Lake Erie. Yet 
the fact remains that down at Crystal Beach, one of the biggest re¬ 
sorts that there is on Lake Erie, the excursion season does not open 
until the 31st day of May, or, rather. Decoration Day, and it closes 
on the <th, or, rather, on Labor Day for one boat, and the other boat 
runs up until about the 15th, not for the purpose of having people 
go bathing, but for the purpose of accommodating the people who 
are living over in that resort up to that time. 

Mr. Gahn. Is not that true on Lake Erie, too? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is what I am speaking of. I am merely point¬ 
ing out this to show you that if there was a possibility of going 
bathing at all, it would be in Lake Erie, because it is farther removed 
from Lake Superior, whose waters I have had experience with, and 
which are extremely cold, consequently it would be warmer in Lake 
Erie than it would be in Lake Huron, and if the passengers had to 
take the water with only a life preserver on them, they are going to 
die from exhaustion. The cold will kill them. Besides that, I want 
some means of getting off the ship, and the men who sent me here 
want it also. 

I have been listening to the testimony submitted here, and from 
what I have heard I have discovered that we are very valuable fel¬ 
lows; we are absolutely necessary for the well-being of all of those 
people that are dependent upon the waterways; and surely those 
men that are here representing the vessel owners are not going to 
deny the right of a seaman, if the passengers do not want boat room, 
to some place to go when it comes to a question of quitting the ship. 

It is true that I have been in accidents. I have been in a ship, not 
on the Lakes but on salt water—and this bill, by the way, does affect 
salt water; it is not confined to the Lakes—but I have been on a pas¬ 
senger ship, one of the largest passenger ships at that time in the 
world, the Campania , of the Cunard Line. We went through a barge 
and cut her in two halves. 

Mr. Jefferis. That was on salt water? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am going to show you the effect of a collision. 
The result of that collision was that there was no danger to us at 
all, but the effects on the men, on the people who were on board that 
ship as passengers—and we had 1,640 passengers on board—was 
terrible. We had to stand and fight the passengers back to prevent 
them from drowning themselves in order to get aboard the boats 
while we were trying to launch the boat to get the people who were 
on the surface of the water who had escaped from the wreck of the 
barge. Eleven people went down with the barge, who did not get an 
opportunity to come out of the forecastle or cabin. The captain was 
drowned, eating his breakfast. But seven men were on deck, and 
those seven men we picked up, not because we had certificated life¬ 
boat men but because we had men qualified and able to handle life- 

48420—21-14 


210 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

boats in any kind of weather. We launched that lifeboat in four min¬ 
utes and a half, because we had sufficient men to launch that life¬ 
boat—that single lifeboat. That was the starboard watch of the 
Campania. 

The port watch, who were all asleep when the collision occurred, 
launched the port lifeboat in 7-J minutes after getting out of their 
beds and being awakened from sleep, because they were seamen and 
not certificated lifeboat men, but actually qualified men, and sufficient 
men to handle that lifeboat. But if the collision had affected us in 
the same manner as it affected the barge with which we came in col¬ 
lision, we would not have had sufficient men to put the lifeboats over. 
I will prove that by the difference in the time of the sinking of the 
Lusitania and the amount of people that were drowned in her and 
the amount of people that were drowned in the Baltic and the time 
elapsing from the time she was struck by the torpedo and the actual 
sinking of the ships. The Lusitania was torpedoed, and about 1,100, 
I' think, went down in her. Thirty minutes elapsed from the time of 
the actual torpedoing of the ship and the time that she sank, but there 
were that many people who went down. 

Mr. Mills. There is no question but what she carried enough 
equipment for all her passengers, is there ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Pardon me, I am trying to get the connection. She 
had the equipment for a certain number of her passengers, but I do 
not think for all. 

Mr. Mills. Do you not know, as a matter of fact, that ever since 
the Titanic went down the British regulations have been very strict 
with regard to the carrying of enough equipment for all of a ship’s 
passengers? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do; yes; but not sufficient men to put the ship’s 
boats over. I am going to make the point, if you will allow me, Mr. 
Congressman; I am trying to make my point clear. I am going to 
show the difference in time and the amount of time given for the 
launching of the boats on the Lusitania and the amount of time given 
for the launching of the boats on the Baltic. 

The Baltic was torpedoed, and sank in 20 minutes. There was one 
life lost on the Baltic , for this reason, that there were sufficient men 
on the Baltic to put over the amount of boats required to carry all 
of the passengers that were on board, together with the crew of the 
Baltic , which only amounted to about 400 people. But the amount 
of crew on board the Lusitania was not sufficient to launch all of the 
boats in the amount of time that elapsed from the torpedoing of the 
ship to the actual sinking of the ship, which was 10 minutes greater 
than the amount of time given to the crew of the Baltic to launch the 
amount of boats sufficient to carry the people. 

Mr. Mills. How do you know that? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because I have the statement of the time given in 
the ships. 

Mr. Mills. The time given; but how do you know that there were 
not enough men to man the lifeboats on the Lusitania ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because I failed in that type of ship—in the Cam¬ 
pania. 

Mr. Mills. But you make the statement, as a matter of fact, that 
there were not enough men on the Lusitania to man the lifeboats of 
that vessel? 


AMENDING SECTIONS Z, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 211 

i ^ r i ^ not . sa A that, sir. I said the amount of men to 

launch the lifeboats, qualified able* seamen. There were not enough. 

Air. AIills. But on what do you base that statement? 

^ Brien. On the amount of men carried by the Lusitania , and 
the amount of boats and equipment required to carry the amount of 
people on board the Lusitania. 

Air. AIills. How many men did she carry? 

Air. O’Brien. The Lusitania carried about 60 able seamen. 

Air. AIills. Plow large a crew? 

Air. O’Brien. Her crew was about 800. 

Air. AIills. And you say 60 able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Air. AIills. How do you define able seamen? 

Mr. O’Brien. That was the number of able seamen ? 

Air. Mills. What were the other 740? 

Mr. O’Brien. They were mostly stewards, who have to be saved 
instead of saving people. 

Air. AIills. How many were there on the Baltic ? 

Mr. O’Brien. On the Baltic the crew amounted to about 350, I 
think. 

Air. Mills. Of those how many were what you call able seamen ? 

Air. O’Brien. On the Baltic , possibly about 34 or 35. 

Air. AIills. Thirty-four or 35? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. AIills. Do you know the regulations applicable to British 
vessels, as to able seamen? 

Air. O’Brien. I do. 

Mr. AIills- AVhat are they? 

Mr. O’Brien. He has to have a certain amount of time at sea. 

Mr. Mills. How much? 

Mr. O’Brien. Three years. 

Air. Mills. Otherwise he can not serve on a vessel? 

Air. O’Brien. As a deckhand, yes; or as a fireman or as a coal 
passer, or as an oiler, or as a steward, or waiter or cook, or in any 
of the other capacities, outside of able seaman. 

Air. Scott. The American regulation is three years, is it not. Air. 
O’Brien? 

Air. O’Brien. Yes. 

Air. AIills. Are the American regulations as to the percentage of 
able seamen much in excess of the British regulations? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. 

Mr. AIills. Well, you have told us that out of a crew of 800 on 
the Lusitania only 60 were required to be able seamen. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is all. 

Air. AIills. Does not the La Follette act require a much higher 
percentage ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Of the deck crew ? 

Mr. Mills. Of the deck crew. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. How many would an American vessel, under the terms 
of this act? 

Mr. O’Brien. She would carry—well, we have not got an Ameri¬ 
can vessel, I think, at present like the Lusitania , but we will take, 
for instance, the St. Louis. 


212 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Mills. How many able seamen did she carry? 

Mr. O’Brien. She would carry probably about 40, all told. 

Mr. Mills. Out of a crew of how many? 

Mr. O’Brien. Out of a crew of about close to 500. 

Mr. Mills. And that would be enough, would it, to save all of the 
passengers ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; that was the amount of deck crew for her. The 
other crew does not enter into the amount of able seamen. 

Mr. Mills. But you contend that the only men that are able to 
handle the boats are these 40 men or 60 men that you refer to; is 
that your contention? 

Mr. O’Brien. I will say this, that my experience has been that the 
only men on board the ships—and I have sailed in all types ; of 
ships—who are qualified and have been found capable of handling 
ships’ boats—that is, putting them over with passengers on board 
the boat—because you do not launch the boats with only the empty 
boat, you have a boat full of passengers—-you have seen moving pic¬ 
tures, I presume, of the boats tipped up and the passengers spilled 
out. That is what the certificated lifeboat man will do. 

Mr. Mills. That is what you say he will do. 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, I have had experience in that exactly along 
those lines. 

Mr. Mills. But the fact is that these large transoceanic vessels, out 
of a crew of 800, carry only 60 or 40 men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is true. 

Mr. Muxs. Do you contend that the other members of the crew 
are totally incapable of lowering a lifeboat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. That answers my question. 

Mr. O’Brien. Pardon me, I want to enlarge on that. Yes, I con¬ 
tend that the only men on board the ships qualified to lower lifeboats 
are able seamen who have had the necessary experience to give them 
that qualification, which can only be acquired by service. I have met 
these so-called bright men who are capable of doing everything until 
they are put up against it, and then they can not do it. 

Mr. Hardy. Explain what you mean by the difference applicable 
to the danger and distress and the service of an able seaman and the 
service of somebody that is not an able seaman and has had no 
experience. 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, Mr. Congressman, the seaman is 
on deck. That is his position. He becomes accustomed to the sea 
and the run of the sea. The average sailor—that is, the average able 
seaman—who has had that experience generally knows when a ship 
is going to take water—that is, when she is going to take the sea. 
If you are in the sea and anything occurs to that ship, it is essential 
that you have knowledge of the run of the sea and know when to 
let go your falls, when to drop the boats, to drop them upon an even 
keel and not spill the passengers out, and not go down head first. 
You must drop those two falls together. Besides that, you have 
quite a weight on your hands—you have a boat full of passengers— 
and you can not put on two or three turns, because if you serve 
the rope too heavy, with the amount of weight that is upon the boat 
itself—upon the falling rope that is holding it—if you serve it or 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 213 


bring it up too fast you are liable to snap the fall and spill all the 
passengers into the water. If you stop the rope with a sudden jerk, 
it will break; so you must keep it running smoothly, and when 
that boat is on the point of landing you must land the two falls 
together and not land the forward fall first, because if there is any 
headway on the boat, and you were to drop the forward end of the 
boat first, the rush of the water between the ship and the boat would 
mean that the boats would turn out like this, with her broadside on, 
and turn over and drown the people as the boat capsized. 

Mr. Gahn. Why can not a certificated lifeboat man do that? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because we have heard of the examinations they re¬ 
ceive. I will tell you about the examination. I have a lifeboat cer¬ 
tificate myself. When they were talking about able seamen, the im¬ 
plication was given that an able seaman did not have to have a life¬ 
boat certificate, but that every able seaman must have a lifeboat 
certificate as well as an able seaman’s certificate or else he does not 
get a job in a passenger boat. So, he carries both qualifications. 

Mr. Scott. On the Titanic how many able seamen did they carry? 
You say, 60? 

Mr. O’Brien. About 60, yes; but that included everybody on deck. 

Mr. Scott. That is, the forward crew? 

Mr. O’Brien. The forward crew. 

Mr. Scott. How many passengers did they have on during that 
accident ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know how many passengers they had. 

Mr. Scott. How many were saved? 

Mr. O’Brien. I know how many were drowned. I think 1,570 
were drowned. 

Mr. Scott. How many were saved? 

Mr. Bankhead. Are you speaking of the Titanic or the Lusitania f 

Mr. Scott. The Titanic now. 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you how many were saved. 

Mr. Scott. You do not know what percentage of the entire pas¬ 
senger list was saved? 

Mr. O’Brien. I know that all the equipment she had was utilized. 

Mr. Mills. Oh, no; do you not know, as a matter of fact- 

Mr. O’Brien. In the Titanicf 

Mr. Mills. Do you not know, as a matter of fact, that in the 
Titanic the boats on the port or starboard side—I forget which— 
were never lowered? 

Mr. O’Brien. Are you not speaking of the Lusitania? 

Mr. Mills, No; I am speaking of the Titanic. 

Mr. Bankhead. Why were they not lowered ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because the boat listed to one side so much that they 
were unable to lower the boats on the other side. 

Mr. Mills. In the case of the Titanic — there is no question about 
that. 

Mr. Scott. Now, take the case of the Lusitania. How many able 
seamen did the Lusitania carry ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Lusitania carried about the same number as the 
Titanic. 

Mr. Scott. How many passengers did they have on board ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. 


214 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Scott. How many were saved ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. 

Mr. Scott. Of course, all your reference in connection with your 
statement here has been to the ocean. The Lusitania and the Titanic 
and the other steamers you mentioned were all ocean liners? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. How far out was the Titanic from shore when she sank? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Titanic was on the tail end of the banks. 

Mr. Scott. How far, about? 

Mr. O’Brien. About 600 miles from Halifax. 

Mr. Scott. How far out was the Lusitania when she sank ? 

Mr. O’Brien. About 8 miles off of the old Kinsale Head. 

Mr. Gahn. Tell us about that examination for the certificated life¬ 
boat men. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; I will be pleased to do that. It is a very simple 
examination. The certificated lifeboat men are given certificates if 
they are capable of pulling an oar or lowering an empty boat off the 
ship’s deck, tie to a dock, without any pasesngers on. I have seen the 
lifeboat certificate given without any lowering of any boat at all, 
where the only necessary qualification required was to pull a boat, 
a yawl boat, in a river, where there was neither sea, wind, nor any 
other thing that would in any way prevent them from being able to 
pull her. That is true. Mr. Thorp told me that his son secured 
one. 

Mr. Scott. In that connection, in order that the record may be 
clear, the law says: 

A certificated lifeboat man is any member of the crew who holds a certificate 
of efficiency issued under the authority of the Secretary of Commerce, who is 
hereby directed to provide for the issue of such certificate. In order to obtain 
a lifeboat man’s certificate, the applicant must prove to the satisfaction of the 
officer designated by the Secretary of Commerce that he has been trained in 
all the operations connected with the launching of lifeboats and the use of 
oars, and that he is acquainted with the practical handling of boats themselves 
and that he is further capable of understanding and answering the orders rel¬ 
ative to the lifeboat service. 

Mr. O’Brien. Then the law is not being lived up to. 

Mr. Mills. How often does the able seaman lower a lifeboat filled 
with passengers ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In times of accident, as a rule. 

Mr. Mills. You have had how many years of experience on sea and 
the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have had 15 years’ experience on the Great Lakes 
and 12 years’ experience on the ocean. 

Mr. Mills. Twenty-seven years at sea? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; I can not say at sea. I have been working for 
the union up to last April, with the exception of 1916, when I was 
sailing about a month, about four or five years. 

Mr. Mills. But for over 20 years you have been an able seaman ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. How often have you lowered a boat filled with pas¬ 
sengers in the course of those 20 years’ experience ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never lowered a lifeboat filled with passengers, 
but I have lowered a lifeboat filled with men—with seamen. 

Mr. Mills. With the crew ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 215 

Mi. () Brien. We used to do it almost twice every trip when I was 
sailing* on the ocean. 

Mr. Mills. Yes; as a part of your- 

Mr. O’Brien. Drill. 

Mr. Mills. Drill? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. And the stewards and the firemen and the other mem¬ 
bers of the crew participated in that drill as well as you, did they not ? 

Mr. O'Brien. Not in the lowering of the lifeboats. 

Mr. Bankhead. How often was the Lusitania torpedoed and sunk? 

Mr. O’Brien. Just once. 

Mr. Bankhead. How often did the Titanic strike an iceberg? 

Mr. O’Brien. Just once. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is my understanding. 

Mr. Mills. I am trying to get, for the benefit of the record, if the 
gentleman please, the actual experience of a so-called seaman, and I 
want to find out whether he has very much more experience than the 
certified lifeboat man. You say you have never lowered a boat with 
passengers in the course of 20 years’ experience ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not with passengers; I have with men, though. 

Mr. Mills. You have lowered a boat with members of the crew 
as a part of what is known as the lifeboat drill? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. Other members of the crew besides yourself partici¬ 
pated in that lifeboat drill, did they not? 

Mr. O’Brien. The only men who lowered boats on board those 
ships were the able seamen. No other man belonging to any part of 
the crew, outside of the deck department, the able seamen, ever 
lowered the boats on board those ships. 

Mr. Mills. On board what ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. On board all the ships I am speaking about. 

Mr. Mills. What ships? 

Mr. O’Brien. All ocean-going ships. 

Mr. Mills. I want to get your personal experience. 

Mr. O’Brien. On board the lake ships the able seamen lower the 
boats. 

Mr. Mills. But I want to get your personal experience. Take a 
boat like the Campania, for instance, that you were on. How many 
boats did she carry? 

Mr. O’Brien. She carried 22 boats. 

Mr. Mills. And how many life rafts ? 

Mr. O’Brien. She carried no life rafts. 

Mr. Mills. No life rafts? How many able seamen did she have? 

Mr. O’Brien. Forty able seamen. 

Mr. Mills. Two to a lifeboat? 

Mr. O’Brien. Less than two. 

Mr. Mills. Does it take two men only to lower a lifeboat full of 
people ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. That is the reason, I said, the Baltic saved 
the people. 

Mr. Mills. When you were on the Campania did it take more than 
two men to lower the lifeboats filled with people ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Did it take more than two ? 


216 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Mills. Did it take more than two men to lower a lifeboat filled 
with people? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. But if there were only 40 seamen and there were 22 
lifeboats there were other men besides the seamen authorized to lower 
the lifeboats, were there not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No. 

Mr. Mills. No? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am going to explain that, if you will allow me. 

Mr. Mills. I wish you would. 

Mr. O’Brien. For the simple reason that they did not lower or 
could not lower all of the lifeboats together, because they did not have 
sufficient able seamen to go around and lower all of them. That is the 
reason. The number of able seamen on board precluded the pos¬ 
sibility of lowering all of the lifeboats at once. 

Mr. Mills. They have a lifeboat drill on these boats, do they not ? 

I have seen it many times. 

Mr. O’Brien. And they have to lower and hoist the boats; yes. 

Mr. Mills. And each member of the crew is assigned to a particular 
lifeboat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. And, on the basis of the number of able seamen, there 
would be two able seamen to each lifeboat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There were four then. 

Mr. Mills. But according to your figures there were two. 

Mr. O’Brien. In the lifeboat drill there were four. 

Mr. Mills. But I am asking you, when they assign two to each 
boat, each man, when the whistle blows, goes to his boat, does he not ? 
Mr. Scott. He stays with his boat. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not on those boats. I am speaking of the 
drills we were in, and I am trying to explain as clearly as I can how 
the drills took place. In the first place, there was not at any time 
sufficient time to handle all of the lifeboats. 

Mr. Mills. In other words, there were not enough able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Mills. But there were other men to help them ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There were other men to help them hoist the boats. 
Mr. Mills. And other men to help lower them ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; the men who lowered the boats were able 
seamen. 

Mr. Mills. Do you mean to have this committee understand that 
you never saw anyone but an able seaman, while you were on the 
Campania, help lower a boat in a lifeboat drill ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never seen anybody, since I have been at sea, 
not only on the Campania but on the Lakes—anybody outside of an 
officer or an able seaman lower any boat on board of a ship. 

Mr. Gahn. You say the entire crew are not required to partici¬ 
pate in the drill in the actual lowering of the lifeboats on the Great 
Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did not say that. I said I never saw anybody but 
an able seaman or an officer. 

Mr. Mills. What do you call lowering a boat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Handling the fall. 

Mr. Mills. Do two men handle it? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 217 

Af 1 " O’Brien. Yes; as a rule, two men handle it. 

Mr. Mills. The two able seamen handle it and the other men 
stand around? 

Mr. O’Brien. The other men stand around? 

Mr. Mills, les; the other members of the crew assigned to that 
particular boat. 

Mr. O’Brien. If you had a man that was not able to handle a line 
alongside of you, he would be in the road; instead of being a help 
he would be a hindrance. 

Mr. Mills. I want to get your idea of what happens when they 
get this lifeboat drill, because that is all you have ever had, and you 
tell me that when they have the lifeboat drill the two able seamen 
handle the falls, and the rest of the men assigned to a boat stand 
around and watch them. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is just what happens. 

Mr. Mills. That is not what I have seen. 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, when you are lowering the boat 
there is nothing else for the men to do but to stand around. When 
you are actually lowering that boat, the men on the deck outside of 
the men handling the falls can not do anything else but stand by and 
look on. 

Mr. Mills. You know that two men can not lower a boat filled 
with people, do you not? 

Mr. O’Brien. I know they do. 

Mr. Mills. Two men? 

Mr. O’Brien. Two men; yes. 

Mr. Mills. Alone? 

Mr. O’Brien. Certainly. I told you that in the Campania, where 
we were talking about the passengers and the men being lowered in 
boats, there were not sufficient men to go around and lower all of 
the boats at once; that the able seamen had to be called to lower the 
boats and help to lower the boats, and that the other men were not 
qualified and did not possess sufficient knowledge or skill to be of any 
assistance in lowering the boats. 

Mr. Mills. Let me ask you one more question and then I will be 
through. I apologize to the committee for having taken up so much 
time. How often did you have these lifeboat drills ? 

Mr. O’Brien. We had a lifeboat drill in New York and a lifeboat 
drill in Liverpool every trip. 

Mr. Mills. If the other members of the crew were allowed to 
participate in these lifeboat drills, how long would it take them to 
become efficient in lowering the boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. As a rule this is what happens: As soon as the men 
discover that there are other men that are supposed to bear the 
responsibility if anything goes wrong with the boat, they are quite 
willing to shirk any responsibility, and consequently do not try to 
acquire that knowledge for this reason, that they are not called upon 
to have the knowledge in their service. 

Mr. Mills. If they were made to acquire it? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know how you can make people acquire 
knowledge. I am not quite sure you can do that. In fact, the acquir¬ 
ing of skill in the lowering of a lifeboat does not raise the status of 
the cook in his estimation. He does not receive any more pay for it, 


218 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


neither does the fireman receive any more wages, and it does not 
raise him in his estimation. The able seaman must have that knowl¬ 
edge. 

Mr. Scott. How heavy are these lifeboats; how much do they 


weigh ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Which lifeboats do you mean ? 

Mr. Scott. I am talking about the lifeboats that you operated on 
the Campania. 

Mr. O’Brien. They weighed approximately 2 tons. 

Mr. Scott. About 2 tons ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. They are on deck f 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. In a berth ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Laying in a- 

Mr. O’Brien. Chock. 

Mr. Scott. In a chock, and they are usually hung on davits ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. And they are single pulleys, are they not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, no. 

Mr. Scott. Double pulleys? 

Mr. O’Brien. Threefold purchases. That means three shifts to 
each block. 

Mr. Scott. I understand that in answer to the question of Mr. 
Mills you said that two able seamen, one at each end of the boat, or 
one at each davit, raised the boat out of her berth—and who swings 
the davit? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did not say anything of the sort. 

Mr. Scott. Then, I misunderstood you. 

Mr. O’Brien. I said that because of the lack of able seamen on 
board all of the boats could not be handled and lowered simul¬ 
taneous. 

Mr. Scott. Then, your statement would be this, that- 

Mr. O’Brien. The other able seamen had to be called to help to 
pick up the lifeboats. 

Mr. Scott. Then, it is not actually true that two able seamen can 
go up to a lifeboat weighing 2 tons, pull her off her berth, swing her 
out clean of the davits, and lower her ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did not say that; I never said that. 

Mr. Davis. What you meant was that there were only two able 
seamen for each of the lifeboats, and for that reason they had to help 
each other in lowering the boats, and, of course, could not lower them 
all at once. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is what I said. 

Mr. Davis. Now, I want to ask you if, aside from any technical 
knowledge, instructions, etc., it is not a very important feature, in 
case of an accident, for the seaman to be cool and free from excite¬ 
ment? 

Mr. O’Brien. He must be. If he is not, he is just in the same 
position as the passenger. 

Mr. Davis. And is it not a further fact that a seaman who has had 
to have at least three years’ experience before he received a certifi- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 219 

cate and who was then continually engaged on deck in manning 
the boats in all kinds of weather and under all conditions, is not more 
likely to know more about the situation in case of an accident than 
a man called from the steward’s department who had no actual 
experience in that respect? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is certainly true. 

Mr. Scott. How many passenger ships on the Great Lakes did 
you work on ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Tienesta. 

Mr. Gahn. As a matter of fact, on the Great Lakes do they not 
require most of the crew, and especially the stewards, to help lower 
the boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They require them mostly to help pull them up. 

Mr. Gahn. They participate in the drills, do they not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. Do they not in an actual catastrophe ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not in lowering the boats; in pulling up a boat. 
Anybody can pull a boat up. 

Mr. Gahn. They all participate actually, more than just the able 
seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They participate, in so far as we have to push the 
boat out, but when it comes to lowering the boat that is where the 
danger lies, in lowering the boat. The actual taking her out of the 
chocks and putting her over the rail does not mean so much. Of 
course, the able seaman must supervise his boat, because he is in 
charge of that boat, and he must see that his guides from the davit 
heads are made fast, or the boat will swing one way or the other as 
it is lowered. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Great Lakes is it not true that other men besides 
able seamen help lower the boats, actually assist in lowering the boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; except the officers. They have to do it, be¬ 
cause there are not sufficient men to lower the boats; not sufficient 
able seamen. 

Mr. Gahn. You never saw a boat lowered on the Great Lakes, did 
you, to save life ? 

Mr. O’Brien. To save life, no; I have never seen a boat lowered to 
save life. 

Mr. Scott. When did you leave the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. When did I leave the Great Lakes ? 
r Mr. Scott. Yes; when did you sail last ? 

Mr. O’Brien. 1916. 

Mr. Scott. Were you on there until after the provisions of this act 
w 7 ent into effect ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; 1916. 

Mr. Scott. What were you on ? 

Mr. O’Brien. On the Tienesta. 

Mr. Scott. On the passenger ship, the Tienesta? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. She is the ship Mr. Davis testified about. She runs 
the long season ? She runs the long haul from Buffalo to Duluth ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. You said you never saw a lifeboat lowered to save life 
on the Great Lakes? 


220 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. Not to save lives; no. 

Mr. Gahn. Passengers or- 

Mr. O’Brien. To save passengers; no. 

Mr. Gahn. Did you ever hear of any boat being lowered on the 
Great Lakes to save passengers’ lives? Did you ever know of any 
case ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, I have never been on any boat that did it 
I just told you that. 

Mr. Gahn. Did you ever hear of any case ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; I have heard that they have lowered the boats 
to save passengers. 

Mr. Gahn. What boats? 

Mr. O’Brien. Some of the D. & C. boats. 

Mr. Gahn. When was that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have read about where a man jumped overboard 
and they lowered the boat and tried to pick him up. 

Mr. Gahn. I am talking about saving passengers. 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, he was a passenger. 

Mr. Gahn. When the boat was going down. 

Mr. O’Brien. I was under the impression that you asked me if any 
boats had been launched to save life. 

Mr. Gahn. That was when a man tried to commit suicide ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Gahn. But never on account of a storm or a vessel in distress ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; last June the men had to save their lives in the 
wreck of that barge. 

Mr. Gahn. That was the crew ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Gahn. Not the passengers? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; there were not any passengers. 

Mr. Scott. They were carrying a 100 per cent life-saving equip¬ 
ment? 

Mr. O’Brien. But in the wreck of the Cowbray , in 1909, they 
picked up nine of the crew frozen to death in the boat on Lake Erie 
in December, 1909. 

Mr. Scott. There were no passengers dead. 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, they would have been dead. 

Mr. ScooSr. There was plenty of life-saving equipment on those 
boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; but it was very cold, and they were frozen 
to death. 

Mr. Scott. What time in December was that? 

Mr. O’Brien. About the 9th of December, I think it was, for 
this reason, that on that same night there were 55 men drowned on 
Lake Erie. The Richardson went down outside of Buffalo, and 
there were six drowned on her. 

Mr. Scott. A freight boat? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. And they carry 100 per cent life-saving appliances? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Clerion went down—was burnt up off of the 
southeast shoal. 

Mr. Scott. What was she, a freight boat? 

Mr. O’Brien. She was a freight boat; yes; and the whole of the 
forward crew went down and were lost. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 221 

Mr. Gahn. This other boat had 100 per cent life-saving equip¬ 
ment? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; but the weather was not so very fine, as we 
have had to describe. 

Mr. Gahn. Mr. Mills, let me ask you a question. In your expe¬ 
rience in seeing these lifeboat drills, did you ever see anybody other 
than the officers and able seamen lower the boats ? 

Mr. Mills. Yes; most decidedly. 

Mr. Gahn. That is what I want to know. Whom have you seen 
other than the able seamen ? 

Mr. Mills. I am not able to distinguish them. 

Mr. Gahn. I mean they were not the able seamen and the officers 
alone who were engaged in actually lowering the boats? That is 
what I want to know. 

Mr. Mills. In the actual lowering of the boats there were certain 
men assigned to each boat, and when that boat was lowered the 
members of the crew assigned to that boat participated in the lower¬ 
ing of the boats and the able seamen did not run from boat to boat. 

Mr. Scott. In the original record in this case, when the bill was 
under consideration—and that was before most of us were Members 
of Congress; if Judge Hardy was here he could undoubtedly re¬ 
member it—I do not think Mr. O’Brien was here—but he showed in 
the original testimony the contests between the steward’s department 
and the certificated lifeboat men and the able seamen, the contests 
that were held between those three departments on a ship, in the 
lowering of the lifeboats, and in the majority of instances the 
steward’s department won the prize. That is in the original record 
that was here at the time the La Follette was up for consideration. 

Mr. O’Brien. Was it a boatman who testified to that? 

Mr. Scott. No; it was a matter admitted, the contests on the 
ships. 

Mr. Perlman. Mr. O’Brien, if the law were carried out to the 
letter with regard to the qualifications of certificated lifeboat men, 
how would they be inferior to able seamen in the lowering of boats? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because you only acquire the skill through ex¬ 
perience—through service." That is the only way you can acquire 
it. You can not get it out of books. 

Mr. Perlman. I understand that. 

Mr. O’Brien. Consequently, you must serve a certain number of 
years on board ship to get that experience. 

Mr. Perlman. Ho not certificated lifeboat men also serve a number 
of years on a boat? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not to my knowledge. All that is required of a 
certificated lifeboat man is to go down and pass an examination 
with regard to his qualifications. 

Mr. Perlman. As a part of the qualifications, do they not have 
to have a certain number of years’ experience? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Chindblom. Would a wheelman who had never handled a 
lifeboat, but had been a wheelman for 3, 5, or 10 years, be materially 
better equipped for lowering a lifeboat than any other man on 
board, than an intelligent steward or an intelligent cook, or any¬ 
body else who had actually been on board ship during the same 
length of time? 


222 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never met a wheelman who had not handled 
a boat. 

Mr. Chindblom. I did not say that. I am asking you what would 
be the situation if you had such a condition. Of course, I know 
that a wheelman handles boats. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is purely hypothetical. 

Mr. Chindblom. Of course, it is, but I want to know how their 
spending three years aboard ship makes a man competent to handle 
a lifeboat. I want to know whether he becomes competent to handle 
a lifeboat if he had not actually handled it. 

Mr. O’Brien. But he does handle it; he gets certain drills. 

Mr. Chindblom. So, then, the steward and the cook, if they get 
the drills, get the same experience ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In order to acquire the skill to become a wheelman 
you must go through the grades of ordinary seaman and watchman, 
and in that time you acquire the skill necessary to be able to handle 
a lifeboat. In the first place, I would not get into any lifeboat that 
a cook or steward or anybody else was going to lower, outside of an 
able seaman, and I do not think anybody else aboard ship would do 
it either. 

Mr. Scott. Do you insist that onty able seamen are permitted to 
handle lifeboats? 

Mr. O’Brien. To lower the lifeboats. 

Mr. Scott. Then I ask you this: After the present able seamen 
are dead, no one else having been permitted to lower the lifeboats, 
where are you going to get the men to make able seamen from 
now on? 

Mr. O’Brien. Through the knowledge acquired- 

Mr. Scott. By looking on ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Through the knowledge acquired by actual par¬ 
ticipation in lowering the yawl boats without anybody in them. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not a fact that the man who is on deck acquires 
a poise and a manner that a fellow who is in the steward’s room does 
not have on deck? 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course he does, Mr. Congressman, for this reason, 
that it is a part of his life. He takes it as just an ordinary thing. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, if he is navigating a ship on deck in stormy 
weather, even if there is no accident, his legs are better accustomed 
to handling the situation? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it true that a man in the steward’s room is as good 
a seaman as a man on deck ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course not; he has not got the sea legs, in the 
first place. 

Mr. Hardy. The able seamen requirements of the La Follette Act, 
so-called, applies only to the deckman? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is all, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. It does not apply to the others ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No. 

Mr. Chindblom. Mr. Chairman, all that may be true, and I do 
not want to be misunderstood, but my point is that a man does not 
acquire experience in handling lifeboats unless he actually handles 
lifeboats. That is the point. And other men besides able seamen, it 
seems to me, can be trained to handle lifeboats. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 223 

Mr. O’Brien. That is perfectly true, provided they get the oppor¬ 
tunity to do that; but my contention is that the men who get the 
lifeboat certificates do not get that opportunity and consequently 
have not got that skill. 

Mr. Mills. What would you say if we provided by law that other 
members of the crew should get lifeboat experience, and that after 
six months, after a certain number of lifeboat drills actually at sea 
or at port, that they should be listed as able seamen? What do you 
say to that? 

Mr. O’Brien. I think 12 months is all that is required for an able 
seaman on the Great Lakes. If a man has- 

Mr. Scott. Eighteen months. 

Mr. O’Brien. Twelve months; and if a man is capable of passing 
an examination after 12 months’ service on the Great Lakes, he 
qualifies not only as a certificated lifeboat man, but he can also get 
an able seaman’s certificate. 

Mr. Bankhead. I want to make this statement: I do not care 
whether we can confirm it or not. I went on a trip to Panama 
recently on a Government-owned vessel, and we had several fire 
drills, and I happened to be in the smoking room at the time these 
men were called to the boats. I went out to look at the operation, 
and I want to say that they sent a lot of waiters and amateur stew¬ 
ards and ignorant-looking Negroes up there to man those lifeboats 
at that drill. Was not that your observation? 

Mr. Chindblom. The whole crew was up there for the drill. 

Mr. Bankhead. But what sort of crew was it that went in the 
boats? 

Mr. Scott. Let me make this suggestion, Mr. Bankhead: The waiter 
who waited on my party was a man named Dallah. He had spent 
four years in the United States Navy, and was an able seaman, and 
he chose to go into the steward’s department because he could make 
more money in there waiting on the table, with his tips, than he could 
otherwise. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did you see those men who manned the boats 
when they had that fire drill? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you think that they are the type of men we 
could safely rely on to get those boats over in actual danger ? 

Mr. Scott. I do not know about that, because we were not put in 
an emergency, but let me call your attention to this fact, that in the 
steward’s department of this particular ship, with which you are 
familiar, in view of the fact that we took the same trip, this man 
Dallah told me that there were four other men in there that he knew 
that were in the Navy at the same time he was, when he had all this, 
training. I do not know how many in the steward’s department were 
qualified able seamen, but those were there in the steward’s depart¬ 
ment in consequence of the increased wages they were able to get.. 
I do not know how prevalent that is on the ocean. 

(Whereupon a recess was taken until 2 o’clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. 

The committee reassembled pursuant to the taking of the recess r 
Hon. William S. Greene (chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. O’Brien. 


224 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Chairman, will you permit me to make a sug¬ 
gestion to this witness ? 

The Chairman. Very well. 

Mr. Bankhead. I think it would be for the benefit of the whole 
committee if the witness would take the proposed amendments up 
in order and tell us exactly why he opposes the proposed changes 
in the pending bill to the law as it now stands. 

The Chairman. I would like to have him do that, myself. 

STATEMENT OF MU. PATRICK O’BRIEN—Resumed. 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Chairman, before I take this thing up as sug¬ 
gested. I would like, in order that the Congressmen may not be under 
a false impression as to the meaning of the lowering of boats— 
I stated that able seamen were required to lower boats; that only 
able seamen in any ship I was ever in were used for lowering boats, 
outside of the licensed officers in the deck department. The lowering 
of the boats actually consists of handling the fall; that is, the rope 
that is passed to the stem and stern of the boat for the purpose of 
landing her from the deck to the water. 

I want to get that clear so that there will be no question in the 
minds of anyone as to what I mean about lowering boats. That is 
the most difficult task in the launching of the lifeboats—in the lower¬ 
ing—because then you have upon your hands the lives of the people 
who are in the boats. Any slip you may make will result in injury 
to the people in the boat, if not death. Through the dropping of 
the forward end or after end of the boats it will mean that the people, 
if not actually killed in the boats, will be drowned or inj ured to such 
an extent they would die from the effects, or, not being able to be 
picked up immediately, they would drown anyhow. The boat would 
topple down on. one end and the whole of the people in that boat 
would slide from the high end down to the lower one and there be in 
a mass that would mean they would be pitched right out of the boat, 
with the possible exception of the people from the upper end. They 
might possibly remain in the boat, but the possibility is they would 
be so badly injured that the most of them would be dead. I want to 
make that clear. 

Mr. Davis. In that connection, how are rafts lowered ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Bafts are lowered in the same manner. You must 
lower your rafts with your davits; you put your falls onto the davits 
and lower them, unless the ship is allowed to sink and the people go 
off on the raft. 

Mr. Edmonds. A raft can be thrown overboard if you want to, 
can it not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I never have seen any rafts thrown overboard: every 
raft I have ever seen launched has been launched in the way I have 
described. 

Mr. Edmonds. You can tie a rope to the raft and throw it over¬ 
board and let the people climb down on it. You can just throw it 
overboard and any side that comes up is all right, is it not, and you 
do not need able seamen for that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, I don’t know; you may throw the raft over¬ 
board and it will break into halves. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 225 

Mr. Edmonds. An able seaman can throw it overboard, too, and it 
will break into halves the same as if it is thrown overboard by any¬ 
body else. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not questioning that. 

Mr. Edmonds. Where does this able seaman get educated in this 
highly technical profession of lowering boats? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the handling of the tackles, as ordinary seamen 
and boys coming along in the natural course of the work that is 
aboard the ships. They will get knowledge of the amount of weight 
on the rope by actually handling this weight on the rope. A practical 
seaman, a good able seaman, an able seaman with the amount of 
experience that is essential to make an able seaman, can tell by the 
feel of the rope as he is surging it whether that rope can stand any 
more weight or not. If he is not capable of doing that, he is not 
an able seaman; in fact he should not have an able seaman’s certificate. 
You acquire that knowledge through the actual handling of the ropes. 

Now, you take boats on that rope and in checking that rope you 
check in such a manner as to retain the full weight of the boat upon 
the line, surging it so that there won’t be jerk; because if you allow 
too much slack and then suddenly bring it up sharp it would mean 
that the line on the boat would snap. 

Mr. Edmonds. Would not a man of any ordinary intelligence, in 
lowering the boat, know how to handle it? 

Mr. O’Brien. I can only answer from what I have seen, and in 
my experience men who have not had the experience in handling lines 
have not been able to handle them. 

Mr. Edmonds. I have seen many a boat lowered and I have seen 
many boats go down, and it does not strike me it would take more 
than 48 hours for me to know how to lower a boat. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not questioning your ability to do it. 

Mr. Edmonds. I have felt that way about it; I may be mistaken 
and you may be able to convince me I am mistaken, but I have felt 
that way about it. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am only giving you my experience. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you think, Mr. Edmonds, that any man of average 
intelligence would feel at home on board a vessel who had been there 
for only 48 hours, as much as one who had been on board vessels for 
five or six years ? 

Mr. Edmonds. I have never felt well on board a boat myself, and 
I have been on them a number of times. 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course, I do not want to contradict Congressman 
Edmonds, and I do not know what experience he has had; but I do 
know this, that green men coming on board ships are not able to do 
the work of able seamen, or are not able to do the work of ordinary 
seamen who have been on the boat for any length of time. 

Mr. Edmonds. I agree with you there. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is the point I am making. 

Mr. Edmonds. But I do not think this boat question is a serious 

OI Mr. O’Brien. If your life depended upon it, I think you would. 

Mr. Gahn. Are all able seamen qualified to lower boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They should be if they are not. 

48420—21-15 


226 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Gahn. Did you say this morning that all able seamen had to 
have lifeboat certificates? 

Mr. O’Brien. I said able seamen are required by the vessel owners 
to carry lifeboat certificates and they are asked that question, despite 
the fact the law does not state that. I do know that that has been 
required by the vessel owners and the masters on board of the ships 
have asked that question, if they have lifeboat certificates. And I 
believe the officers on the ships are carrying lifeboat certificates as 
well. 

Mr. Gahn. Is that true on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; we are speaking of the Great Lakes now. 

Mr. Gahn. But you do not mean to say the law requires it? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not say that; no, sir. It does not require it, 
but they have construed it that way. 

Mr. Gahn. You say every vessel requires its crew of able-bodied 
seamen to have lifeboat certificates? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do; yes, sir; and every able-bodied seaman carries 
a lifeboat certificate. I have had to do it; when I shipped on the 
Tionesta I had to go to the life-saving station and get a lifeboat 
certificate. 

Mr. Gahn. And every able-bodied seaman on the Great Lakes has 
a lifeboat certificate? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would not say every able-bodied seaman on the 
Great Lakes has a lifeboat certificate, but I am telling you what I 
know of the requirements of the passenger-boat owners from the 
men who are taken on board of their boats from our organization. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. On the Lakes. 

Mr. Gahn. And all of your men have lifeboat certificates? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Is that the usual method you suggest of getting your 
certificate; the procedure you followed is the usual method of getting 
a certificate? 

Mr. O’Brien. That was it in Buffalo. 

Mr. Scott. Don’t you think, Mr. O’Brien, that the life-saving 
service on the Great Lakes is fairly competent to pass judgment on a 
man’s ability to operate the life-saving devices? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would not want to claim that the life-saving 
people were not competent to examine; but I do claim that the 
things they have for giving the examination are not there. In the 
first place, they have not got the lifeboats to lower. The examina¬ 
tion that I saw—because two other men were examined at the time 
I was examined—they went into a boat and they tried to pull—a 
yawl, too, if you please—about in the river. Now that was in Buffalo 
in the year 1916. I had received my able seaman’s certificate in 1915, 
but I did not sail until 1916, because I was employed by the organi¬ 
zation. In 1916, when I went to sail, I discovered the able seamen’s 
certificate was not sufficient to give me a berth on board of those 
ships and I had to go and pass an examination as a certificated life¬ 
boat man. And I had to laugh, and the captain of the lifeboat 
crew laughed with me, at the examination. 

Mr. Hardy. What was it; tell us what it was? 

Mr. O’Brien. My examination consisted—he asked me several 
questions and asked me how to lower a lifeboat—how I would lower 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 227 


a lifeboat. I told him, because I had had a lot of experience in life¬ 
boats. I told him, and I didn’t even have to step in a boat; I never 
had to pull an oar on the boat. I answered the questions and the 
captain of the lifeboat men, who was a qualified man, knew I was 
capable of doing the work for which I had come down to get a cer¬ 
tificate, simply because I actually knew these things. And on board 
of those ships I served, I had acquired a great deal more skill than 
ever you will find on the Lakes. 

Mr. Gahn. Why is that; because you never use lifeboats on the 
Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; it is not because of that, but because of the 
fact I had to go through the training as a boy, up to the rank of 
able seaman, that I have acquired the knowledge or skill of an 
able seaman. 

Mr. Hardy. What was the examination they put anybody through 
in order to demonstrate his fitness; that is what I want to know. 

Mr. O’Brien. If he was capable of pulling this boat; that is, 
pulling an oar, what we call pulling an oar—rowing a boat. 

Mr. Scott. Did you hear the other examinations given? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; I was there. 

Mr. Scott. You heard the questions that the captain of the life¬ 
saving crew asked the other men? 

Mr. O’Brien. Those two men who were there could not even do 
that. 

Mr. Scott. Could not do what? 

Mr. O’Brien. Could not row a boat. They were turned down 
right there. 

Mr. Scott. Who turned them down? 

Mr. O’Brien. The captain, and he said to me right there, “There 
are hundreds of fellows coming here in the same way, who do not 
know how, and the requirements are not here, anyhow. We have 
not the facilities for giving an examination.” I would like to go 
aboard a passenger boat and be given the privilege of examining a 
crew with the amount of weight that the lifeboat would be called 
upon to carry, and to put the certificated lifeboat men at the falls 
lowering them; not only on the lake when it is blowing, but even 
at the dock when it is calm. And you know the real sailors do joke 
about some of the drills that are pulled off on the Lakes. Now, I 
wanted to make that clear. 

Mr. Gahn. Why do they joke; because they think there is never 
any occasion to put those drills into practice? 

Mr. O’Brien. No. 

Mr. Gahn. Then, why do they joke about them? 

Mr. O’Brien. At the lack of attention given to the apparent value 
of the seamen’s lives. 

Mr. Edmonds. Some of them are a joke. 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, probably they are, or they would not be there; 
they would probably go away from that service altogether. Prob¬ 
ably they are. 

Mr. Edmonds. I mean some of the drills up on the Lakes. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is what I say; they are a joke—some of the 
drills. And if the drill was carried out, we would have an oppor¬ 
tunity to see the skill of the certificated lifeboat men. 


228 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Now, I was on the Tionesta , and I have been on the Americana. 
There was a chance when I was sailing on her and I had charge of 
a boat, and every week—not every season, but every week—I had 
to try to teach the fellows who were in that boat how to take the 
cover off; not alone how to lower the boat. No man aboard that 
ship would be man enough to drill that in on the crew, outside of 
the able seamen, outside of the deck officers, who were qualified to 
lower the boat down. And that was without anybody being in the 
boat. I am not testifying here in order that you will wipe out 
certain things in the bill, because these things are actual facts, gen¬ 
tlemen. 

Mr. Scott. Is that the Tionesta you are talking about? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is the Americana that carries 3,500 passengers 
across to Canada. 

Mr. Scott. Now you are talking about ocean-going boats? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; I am speaking about the Lakes—the boat 
that runs between Buffalo and Crystal Beach, Canada. And I am 
sure the same condition prevails in practically all of them. Another 
thing: When it comes to lifeboat drills or, say, fire drills, the word is 
passed along that at a certain time the lifeboat drill is going to 
take place, or fire drill. Now, you do not drown persons per schedule; 
these things do not happen at certain hours. The crew is ready, the 
whistle is blown, and every man runs to a station and has his place. 
And even then there is considerable excitement in trying to get the 
fellow not in the deck department acquainted with the place he has 
to stand. Those things are actual facts. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do not the United States inspectors ever require a 
boat drill or a fire drill ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The United States inspectors come down supposedly 
without having given the crew knowledge the drill is to take place; 
but I was never on board a ship where I did not know it for a couple 
of hours in advance when the drill was going to take place. 

Mr. Edmonds. Even with the United States inspectors coming 
down ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Even with the United States inspectors coming 
down. 

Mr. Scott. You do not know that there are not frequent drills on 
the Lakes that are held when the United States inspectors come down 
without any notice of it at all ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never seen any, and I was on the Tionesta . 
and we had those drills, and the time was known in advance when 
those drills would take place. Now, as I said, we do not drown 
people per schedule; we are liable to have an accident at any time. 
We had an accident up in Lake Superior when there was a collision 
and when nobody was saved—everybody went down. 

Mr. Scott. That was a freight boat? 

Mr. O’Brien. The freight boat is weaker than the passenger boat, 
too—not as strong. 

Mr. Scott. And they carry 100 per cent life-saving equipment, 
too. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not denying that: I am pointing out that a ship 
'’an be sunk without having a gale of wind and all hands be drowned. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; that is true. 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 229 


Mr. O’Brien. And in reference to the raft that came ashore from 
the steamer Cypress , in October, 1907, on Lake Superior, that ship 
was making her first or second trip—her fifth trip, I believe. 

Mr. Briggs. How large a ship was she? 

Mr. O’Brien. About 400 feet long. 

Mr. Briggs. A passenger vessel ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; a freight vessel. And nobody knows—at 
least I do not, only from hearsay—how the ship happened to go 
down. She filled up with Avater, a steamship, and sunk so rapidly 
in fact, that the only thing that they got was a raft. Eight men got 
on that raft, according to the reports at that time, and out of the 
eight men—and they were all seamen—one man reached the shore 
alive. And he was a great big, powerful man—I knew him per¬ 
sonally, Charlie Pitts—who was second mate on the ship. One man 
out of the eight that got on that lifeboat managed to reach shore 
alive, and that was in October. 

Mr. Scott. That was on Lake Superior? 

Mr. O’Brien. That was on Lake Superior, in October. The raft 
was capsized, was turned over, and as she turned over, one by one as 
the men were dumped into the water they dropped off and died; 
their vitality was not sufficiently strong to enable them to hang on. 

Mr. Scott. Did any of the lifeboats get to shore? 

Mr. O’Brien. The vessel sunk. 

Mr. Scott. I know, but did they get any lifeboats off? You re¬ 
quire 25 per cent lifeboats. 

Mr. O’Brien. No; there was not any lifeboat got to shore; there, 
was not any lifeboat launched. 

Mr. Scott. So that the lifeboat is the same as the raft? 

Mr. O’Brien. So that we are not in a position to state—I am not 
in a position to state—as to whether the lifeboats would have got to 
shore or not. I know I would prefer the Tionesta , even in the 
middle of the summer, on Lake Superior, because I have been over¬ 
board there and the shock is not at all nice. It is icy cold water on 
Lake Superior, and this bill does not confine itself to Lake Michigan. 
It takes in Lake Superior. 

Mr. Scott. Oh, there are no short runs on Lake Superior. You 
know that, because you have sailed up there. 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, yes; there are short runs. 

Mr. Scott. You name them. 

Mr. O’Brien. You can make short runs; you can run from Su¬ 
perior to Duluth, Ashland to Duluth, or you can make the run be¬ 
tween Marquette and the Soo. 

Mr. Scott. You could do it; you could do a lot of things; but there 
are no short runs there—there are no boats operated on them. I am 
talking about the ruils. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am talking about the runs. 

Mr. Gahn. There never have been any short runs on Lake Su¬ 
perior, have there? 

Mr. O’Brien. There are passenger boats running there. I do not 
know about the runs- 

Mr. Scott. Where are they? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have seen passenger boats running out of Superior 
and Duluth. 


230 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. Where do they run? 

Mr. O’Brien. I don’t know. 

Mr. Scott. No ; I guess you don’t, because they do not run. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am telling you about the boats. 

Mr. Scott. They are not running, unless it has been in recent 
years. I can not speak as to recent years because I have not been 
up there. 

Mr. O’Brien. This was a few years ago. 

Mr. Scott. Then probably we are talking about the same time. 

Mr. O’Brien. Now, about the boats taken by the Government. 
The implication was made here they were taken because of the sea¬ 
men’s act. The Government did not say anything about the seamen’s 
act; the Government required those ships during the war, and they 
were taken and paid for. I do not know how much they paid for 
them or how much was paid for them. It is immaterial to me. I 
am not a shipowner; I am not in competition in sailing ships; the 
only thing I wanted to state is this, that the seamen’s act had noth¬ 
ing whatever to do with the taking of the ships from the Lakes to 
salt water. They were required, and I am sure that the gentlemen 
who gave these ships were only too eager and willing to give to the 
Government the things that the Government required during the 
war. I know we gave our services and we faced the torpedoes, and 
in a great number of instances we had no guns to protect us. And 
we were on very, very slow ships, running across the Atlantic, and 
Ave did not flinch when it came to the question of the Government 
requiring us to serve the country. We called the men about and 
the American seamen responded, the American seamen who had been 
driven from the sea by the conditions that prevailed prior to the 
passage of the seamen’s act. Those men responded until to-day we 
have at sea, or we had last December, 51 per cent of the personnel 
American born—not naturalized citizens, but American born—sail¬ 
ing on American ships. Prior to the passage of the seamen’s act the 
amount of American seamen sailing was only 7 per cent, excluding 
the licensed officers. 

Mr. Edmonds. Just stop right there, Mr. O’Brien. Are you speak¬ 
ing about the sea, the ocean, or are you talking about the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. I digressed because I probably forgot the fact, or 
rather tried to prove, that the shipowners were willing to give their 
ships, and I also lapsed into the thought that we had not only given 
everything we had but were offering our services. 

Mr. Edmonds. I know you did, and I appreciate that; but I just 
want to correct your statement regarding 51 per cent of the seamen 
being American born. It is not so. 

Mr. Bankhead What statement have you there, Mr. Edmonds? 

Mr. Edmonds. A statement just made by the United States Bureau 
of Navigation. 

Mr. Bankhead. I saw a statement in the papers the other day 
that made it even stronger than he has made it here. 

Mr. Edmonds. This statement is by the United States Bureau of 
Navigation and for the last six months ending December 1, 1920; 
it shows that in the overseas trade 60 per cent of the seamen are 
foreigners, 7 per cent naturalized, and 33 per cent Americans. In 
the near-by foreign trade, taking in the Gulf trade, 64 per cent are 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 231 


foreigners, 6 per cent naturalized, and 30 per cent Americans. In 
the coastwise trade 47 per cent are foreigners, 11 per cent naturalized, 
and 42 per cent Americans. The average of the whole lot is 60 per 
cent foreigners, 7 per cent naturalized, and 33 per cent Americans. 

Now, this statement was made by the department. The report was 
gotten up at my request, because I wanted to find out how they stood 
at sea. 

I want to call your attention ,to something else. When was the 
seamen’s act passed? 

Mr. O’Brien. In 1914 it was passed. 

Mr. Edmonds. And was put into effect in 1915 ? 

Mr. O’Brien. And went into effect in 1915. 

Mr. Edmonds. In 1914, 47.4 per cent of all the seamen on the sea 
were Americans or naturalized Americans. In 1915, 43.5 per cent— 
a reduction of 4 per cent—were Americans or naturalized. In 1916, 
43.2 per cent were Americans or naturalized. In 1917, 42.9 per cent 
were Americans or naturalized—another reduction of 1 per cent. In 
1918, 41.9 per cent were Americans or naturalized. In 1919, 47.6 per 
cent were Americans or naturalized. In 1920, 50.5 per cent were 
Americans or naturalized. 

Mr. O’Brien. I believe you will remember there has been a great 
increase in the shipping of the United States since that time. 

Mr. Edmonds. That is true. 

Mr. O’Brien. That included all the officers? 

Mr. Edmonds. No; it does not include the officers. I got a sepa¬ 
rate list for the officers. I am giving you the seamen. It is true the 
officers would raise the average, but these figures do not include the 
officers. This report is for the seamen only. 

Mr. O’Brien. I took a census myself of the nationality of the sea¬ 
men on the Great Lakes- 

Air. Edmonds. I agree with you. I had this made in regard to the 
overseas trade and the coastwise trade, because I believe on the Great 
Lakes the percentage is more Americans than it is in the ocean and 
coastwise trade. 

Air. O’Brien. We have also had the census taken and we have the 
opportunity for taking the census, too, because there is not a man that 
joins our organization whose nationality is not put down, and any 
other question as well, when he is joining, as to whether he is a citi¬ 
zen or has his naturalization papers, or if he intends to become a 
citizen. 

Mr. Edmonds. If a man joins a ship, he has to go before the Com¬ 
missioners of Navigation, does he not? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not always. 

Mr. Edmonds. Does he become a seaman or anything like that, or 
does he go and join a ship without going before the Commissioners of 
Navigation? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. In fact, all of the coastwise trade prac¬ 
tically does that. 

Mr. Edmonds. The coastwise trade is on the sea? 

Air. O’Brien. I am talking about the men who join the ships. 

Mr. Edmonds. A man certainly must enlist somewhere. He goes 
before the Commissioners of Navigation under the law and enlists, 
does he not, or whatever you call it? 


232 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; he joins the ships. However, Mr. Furu- 
seth has the statistics there and I would prefer he would answer that 
question. 

Mr. Davis. Are these figures you have, Mr. Edmonds, with ref¬ 
erence to the vessels flying the American flag only ? 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes; American merchant vessels. 

Mr. O’Brien. The Shipping Board has compiled the list that Mr. 
Edmonds has now. 

Mr. Edmonds. I think the official list for anything we do is the 
list furnished by the Commissioners of Navigation. I can not see 
that the Shipping Board has anything to do with producing any¬ 
thing authentic at all. 

Mr. Scott. Except on their own ships. 

Mr. Edmonds. Except on their own ships. The Commissioners 
of Navigation surely would be able to furnish us with a proper list. 
They were five months in getting this up, at my request. 

Mr. O’Brien. Supposing the Shipping Board has its own list, 
that don’t include the Lakes. The probabilities are the percentage 
would be somewhat smaller. 

Mr. Edmonds. I would like to have you show me something to 
disprove the report of the Commissioners of Navigation of the 
United States. 

Mr. O’Brien. I can only give you my own statement and the 
census taken by me on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Edmonds. Of course, it is understood a man on this list may 
have enlisted five times during the time this list was made up, and 
there may be duplications; but the average would be about the same. 

Mr. O’Brien. I was not giving that; I was giving the census right 
from the cards in our office showing the nationality of our men, who 
would not come back and rejoin every two months. 

Mr. Scott. Then the only list you have are members of your 
union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. You do not keep a record of the men outside of 
your union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. We can not do that. 

Mr. Edmonds. Are there any? 

Mr. O’Brien. There are quite -a number. 

Mr. Scott. All the men who go on the ships register with the com¬ 
missioners. 

Mr. Edmonds. That is the way I understand it. 

Mr. Scott. Am I right about that, Mr. O’Brien? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; they don’t. Now, it is immaterial, because we 
do not employ the men. And the answer given here in the contro¬ 
versy that has just come up is that the shipowners do not want the 
Americans. 

Mr. Scott. Why? 

Mr. Hardy. I wish you would state all the information you have 
as to the percentage of American seamen before the passage of this 
bill on our ships, and the percentage since—whether it has increased 
or decreased. 

Mr. O’Brien. It was 7 per cent. 

Mr. Scott. Where? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 233 

Mr. Hardy. Separate it and make it as broad as you can—ocean 
seamen, coastwise seamen, and lake seamen—what is the percentage. 
If you have not got it separated, just give the aggregate. 

Mr. O’Brien. I only have the aggregate. 

Mr. Hardy. In the first place, I want to know what percentage 
of our seamen were American citizens, either naturalized or 
American-born, and what percentage were foreigners. 

Mr. O’Brien. I can only give you the American born; we do not 
take the naturalized. 

Mr. Hardy. Give us what percentage were American born before 
this law went into effect. 

Mr. O’Brien. About 7 per cent before the bill passed and in 
December, according to a census taken by our organization, which 
is authentic and can be verified at any time, there were 51 per 
cent American-born. 

(At this point the committee took a recess for 30 minutes to 
answer a roll call in the House, at the termination of which the 
hearing was resumed as follows:) 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I object to this part 
of the proposed bill relating to the able seamen, going back to the 
40 per cent again and then arriving, after four years more, at the 
65 per cent we have now. 

It is also provided that on the Great Lakes and their connecting 
waters, certificated lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen— 
not only for the purpose of manning the lifeboats, but practically 
for the purpose of doing everything on board of the ship. The 
amount of men required to-day is not so great as one would be led 
to believe by the testimony that has been given here. If the men 
who are serving in the different departments as watchmen on board 
the passenger boats, if their positions were filled by able seamen, 
the additional cost to the shipowners would be very, very small. The 
difference in the wages of the able seaman and the ordinary seaman 
is very little. It was $85 and $125 last year. That was the amount 
per month, or $40 difference per month per man. It does not mean 
that they w T ould have to employ new men, but that those men in 
the places filling the watchmen’s places, such as the cabin watch¬ 
man, deck watchman, smokestack watchman, and these other watch¬ 
men they have, could be taken from the able seamen and then they 
would have those men there to handle the lifeboats to preserve the 
lives of the people who are traveling upon these boats. 

It has been said there is nobody here to represent the people 
except, of course, the elected Congressmen, and that they have no 
representation here directly. And we in our humble way are en¬ 
deavoring to protect the public as well as the seamen who are sailing- 
on the Great Lakes. I have tried to show you that the lifeboat cer¬ 
tificated man does not receive an examination that Avould qualify 
him for handling boats, in the lowering, especially. I have testified 
as to the type of examination which I myself received. I think if 
proof is necessary, that it could be easily verified by examinations 
of those men who are supposed to be able to do this work by com¬ 
petent men who understand the handling of boats, either a committee 
or a commission, that would try to find out whether those men are 
really qualified or not. 


234 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Somebody suggested that a certain amount of time be given to the 
certificated lifeboat man in order that he may have some experience 
besides whatever little examination he gets. On the Lakes and on 
the ocean the amount of time that the bill now in existence gives is 
12 months; but any man of exceptional ability will or ho might be 
capable of qualifying as an able seaman or certificated lifeboat man. 
That in itself precludes the possibility of men of exceptional ability 
being discriminated against. 

Mr. Mills. Do you mind being interrupted ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would prefer to go on, and then I will close on that 
question in a minute. 

Mr. Mills. Go ahead. 

Mr. O’Brien. For that reason I do not think that it is necessary 
to-day to ask that we reduce the skill of the merchant marine. It is 
not a question of a shortage of men any longer. There are thou¬ 
sands and thousands of our men of the merchant marine walking the 
streets to-day who have served their time on board of ships, quali¬ 
fied as able seamen, with the necessary skill to do the work on board 
of these ships. And now a bill comes along that is to discriminate 
against those men who were called to sea to serve the country and 
during the years that have elapsed since that time have acquired the 
skill necessary to give them the right to serve on board of ships and 
to prevent the possibility of loss of life through lack of skill. If 
there was a shortage of men, and when there was a shortage of men, 
gentlemen, we never objected to the dilution of the merchant marine, 
and we ourselves went on board of those ships and taught the men 
who came to the sea who did not have the skill necessary on board 
of the ships. We helped those men and tried to give them the neces¬ 
sary skill that would enable them to do the work, all during the war, 
and that would enable the American Nation to have a merchant 
marine of its own. We endeavored, and we have tried to bring about 
schools to give the necessary skill, when on shore, schools for those 
men that would enable them to be in a position to compete with the 
seamen of the foreign nations; and to-day we have those schools 
established. It is true that it takes time and money to do those 
things, but all that we have asked of the shipowners, to cooperate 
with us, is to see that the men, if possible, can be induced to recognize 
the necessity of acquiring that skill. 

Ships must be handled. The quicker the turn around there is in 
the ship the better it is for the owner. I do not know whether the 
shipowner realizes these things or not. I do not know whether he 
understands that the less repairs there are to his ship the better it is 
for his shareholders. We are trying to do these things. We have, 
in the short space of time that has been given to us, tried to instill 
the necessary amount of skill in the men that we now have. 

Mr. Edmonds. You say “ we ”; who do you mean? 

Mr. O’Brien. The seamen. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do you mean the seaman’s union have done any¬ 
thing on this or the Shipping Board? 

Mr. O’Brien. The seamen. 

Mr. Edmonds. Who paid the expenses? Did you pay them your¬ 
selves ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 235 

Mr. Edmonds. You run the schools ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. Where do you run them? 

Mr. O Brien. In San Francisco. And at our last convention we 
decided t° set aside a certain sum to start. That sum was $15,000. 

Mr. Edmonds. When was your last convention held ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Last January. 

Mr. Edmonds. Since the war? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. Where did you educate them during the war? 

Mr. O’Brien. On board of the ships. We had no other way to 
educate them, because of the shortage of the men. 

Mr. Edmonds. How did the seaman’s union educate them on board 
of the ships? 

Mr. O’Brien. By not recognizing, as other crafts do, the necessity 
of trying to have a job trust. We could have refused to allow the 
other fellow the opportunity of seeing how things were done, if we 
were built that way, but we are not. We tried to give those men 
every opportunity; we coached them on every possible occasion; 
taught them even in the forecastles when our watches were below. 
And those were the instructions of the seaman’s union to the men 
on board of the ships and to the men going to sea. 

Mr. Edmonds. Was it your union that prevented the firemen and 
mechanics on board from doing the ordinary repairs on board of 
the ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. What union was that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That would be one of the other unions. 

Mr. Edmonds. The ordinary tightening up of a bolt or a nut on 
board of a ship, what union would that be ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is not our union. That would be the ma¬ 
chinists’ union—a shore union—that is fighting to get jurisdiction 
over the repairs. They claim to have the right to come on board of 
the ship and do this work, and we claim we have the right to do all 
the work on board of a ship. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do your unions—I do not know which one it is; the 
engineers or the firemen’s union—do they do the ordinary repairs on 
the ship in order to keep the ship in operation ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. I was informed by the Shipping Board that some 
union tried to prevent their men from making the ordinary repairs 
on board of the ship. 

Mr. Conway. Answering for the firemen’s union, I can answer that 
better than he could. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think, Congressman, that any of the sea¬ 
going unions have ever issued orders that would in any way prevent 
any man on board of a ship from doing any work on board of a ship 
required by the owner or the master. 

Mr. Edmonds. I have a list of repairs in my office upstairs that 
were required by a ship that got into port. These repairs were re¬ 
quired to be done in port—repairs that any self-respecting man ought 
to have been ashamed to ask to be done. 


236 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. Congressman, I do not think it was because the men 
on board the ship refused to make the repairs; there must have been 
some other things in there. 

Mr. Edmonds. I do not know where the order came from, but when 
a man refuses to tighten up a nut or put on a new nut, or put in a new 
bolt, or something like that, he is not much of a man to go on a ship. 

Mr. O’Brien. We can not go any further than we have. We have 
published ourselves and sent out 70,000 copies of a book asking our 
men to do those things, and we are striving to get all of the work 
on board of the ship all of the time. Now, that is as true as I am 
standing at this table. 

Mr. Edmonds. Every bargain should have a give and a take. You 
folks asked for certain protection in the La Follette bill, certain im¬ 
provement of your position. I think you ought to give something 
for it. 

Mr. O’Brien. Aren’t we doing so ? 

Mr. Edmonds. You have not. Whatever union this is that asked 
for the repairs of the character I mentioned to be done on shore to the 
ship has not. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not responsible for anything that may be asked 
by any other union than the union I represent. 

Mr. Edmonds. Of course; I know that. I am only trying to find 
out exactly where the responsibility lay. 

Mr. O’Brien. It is true that men strive to get work. Now, we have 
striven and are striving to get control of all of the work we possibly 
can on board of the ship, and our wages are not nearly as great as the 
wages of the men in the shore unions. 

Mr. Bankhead. Let me ask you one question, but not on this same 
matter. What is the difference in the wage scale of a certificated life¬ 
boat man and of an able-bodied seaman, on the Great Lakes, if any? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know anything about those certificated life¬ 
boat men, excepting on the wage question. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is what I asked you. 

Mr. O’Brien. The certificated lifeboat man might be a steward; 
he might be a cook; he may be a bell boy; he may be in any of those 
jobs, or a cabin patrolman, or a mess bo}^. All of those men may 
have lifeboat certificates. 

Mr. Bankhead. But if they were, they' would not draw the wages 
of an able seaman, would they? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. They would only draw the wages for the work 
they actually did? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. You see. the amount of wages, the differ¬ 
ence, between a bell boy who might be certificated and an able sea¬ 
man would be considerable. There would be considerable difference 
between the two. The bell boy. I believe, gets about $10 or $20 a 
month. 

Mr. Hardy. The lifeboat certificate does not cut any figure in his 
wages ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Bankhead. This bill provides over here, as an amendment to 
section 13, that on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters cer¬ 
tificated lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 237 


Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is, in complying with the requirements as to 
the percentage of men, under the general law, who are required to 
have a rating of not less than that of able seaman ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. What I was trying to do was to ascertain the 
difference the owners of the vessel would have to pay if their crew 
was certified lifeboat men, as compared with what they would have 
to pay if they used able seamen. 

Mr. O'Brien. We will say, for instance, there were a certain num¬ 
ber of able seamen on board of the ship—10, for illustration—and 
that there were 10 certificated lifeboat men in the culinary depart¬ 
ment. The shipowner would not be called upon to employ any 
skilled men outside of those 10 certificated lifeboat men who were 
cooks and stewards in order to run his ship. That is what that bill 
means. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is the point I want to make clear. 

The Chairman. You said you sent out some 70,000 books? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Where did you send those? You did not send 
any of them here to Washington, did you? Where did you send 
them? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; we sent some of them here. 

The Chairman. If they are kept under cover—we all may have 
books and sit down on them, and I want to know where those 70,000 
books were sent. 

Mr. O’Brien. I will tell you. I happened to be in the office where 
the printer sent those books from. That was in Chicago, and every 
port on the chain of lakes received a certain amount of those books 
for. distribution amongst the seamen who go to sea on the chain of 
lakes. The same condition prevailed in every port where we have 
an office from Maine to Port Arthur, Tex. The same condition pre¬ 
vailed there. Each and every officer of the organization- 

The Chairman. I thought the 70,000 were for general distribu¬ 
tion, and, if so, I might have seen one at some time during my service 
here, but I never did. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would be glad to send you one. 

The Chairman. I do not know whether it would be of any value 
to me, but I have never seen any. And I want to know, if you sent 
them out, why I have never seen any. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know why you have never seen any. We 
wanted to educate the men who went to sea. 

The Chairman. I would like to be educated myself. 

Mr. O’Brien. We did not imagine that would be necessary, Mr. 
Greene. However, this is the point, that I and the seamen who have 
sent me here are especially against; that is, the dilution of the 
merchant marine at a time when the country is flooded with skilled 
men, capable of saving life and who have acquired that skill in the 
service of the country in time of war and are now to be thrown on 
the dock for green hands to come aboard who might possibly have the 
knowledge of pulling an oar. 

Mr. Mills. Have you anywhere described the duties of an able 
seaman on the modern passenger vessel ? 



238 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. The duties of an able seaman on the modern passen¬ 
ger vessel—an able seaman must be capable of executing any order 
on board of the ship pertaining to the deck department; steering a 
ship; know how to keep a lookout properly; handle lamps, paint; 
splice lines, wire or rope; know how to handle lines; how to take 
the ship from her moorings, how to take up her anchor. The amount 
of things that the able seaman must know—I do not want to tire 
you gentlemen, but believe me the amount of things the able seaman 
is required to know on board of the ship would fill several pages 
and which, if he does not know, his ostracization would take place 
immediately. The other men know that they have to do that man’s 
work. 

And this is another thing that I want to bring to your attention 
in conjunction with the skill of the able seaman and the lack of • 
skill on the part of the certificated lifeboat man. The able seaman, 
who is an American whom we have brought to the sea and whom we 
went out to the country and asked to come to sea—they are here 
trying to get jobs and some are on the ships holding jobs. Those 
men have acquired a certain amount of skill. The standard of the 
American is much higher than the standard of the European. That 
boy or young man now has been raised in a certain atmosphere; he 
has been used to working with certain people also. He is now going 
to be called upon, in case of a scarcity of men, not only to do the 
work that he is called upon to do but to do the work of the unskilled 
man with him he is going to be brought in contact. The consequence 
of that will be that these unskilled men upon whom you are going to 
depend for the instructions that the unskilled are to receive, will be 
driven from the sea; and when it comes to meeting competition, if 
you have not skill in your merchant marine your merchant marine 
will die of itself. You must be able to compete with the opppsi- 
tion; you must be able to compete through the skill that your per¬ 
sonnel has. 

Mr. Gahn. Did not the operators on the Great Lakes have able 
seamen on their boats before 1914? 

Mr. O’Brien. They did, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. Have they not always had ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They had, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. Have they had any more able seamen on the Great 
Lakes since 1914 than they had before ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Do you mean in numbers ? 

Mr. Gahn. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. 

Mr. Gahn. What harm does this bill do, then, to the able seamen on 
the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. It simply eliminates them. 

Mr. Gaiin. How ? 

Mr. O’Brien. By putting in their places green men with lifeboat 
certificates. 

Mr. Gahn. The green man can not take the place of the able seaman 
on the Great Lakes, can he ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Why can’t he ? 

Mr. Gahn. Unless he is qualified to do the work. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 239 

Mr. O’Brien. Pardon me. It says right here: 

- provided. That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters certificated 
lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, will you permit me right there: That provision 
in this bill leaves it with the boat owners as to whether they will 
have any able seamen on the Great Lakes or not? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr* Hardy. They may fill up their whole crew—deck and every¬ 
thing else—with certificated lifeboat men, where heretofore able 
seamen have been required? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. In other words, it leaves no able seamen required to 
be employed on these vessels ? 

Mr. O’B rien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Chindblom. Now, Mr. O’Brien, did you read from page 5 
just now? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; I read from page 4. 

Mr. Gahn. Mr. O’Brien, they could not man the boats—they could 
not run the boats—unless they were able seamen in addition to being 
certificated lifeboat men, could they ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I know they could not run them successfully, and I 
am trying to prevent the shipowners from committing suicide. 

Mr. Scott. Before the law they were using able seamen on the 
Great Lakes, were they not, Mr. O’Brien ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They were using wheelsmen. The watchmen and 
deck hands had to pass coal and be deck hands as well. 

Mr. Gahn. The present law requires them to use only 65 per cent 
of able seamen in the crew ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. They can still use 35 per cent of certificated lifeboat 
men? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. . 

Mr. Gahn. The lifeboat men, unless they are able also to take the 
places of able seamen—they could not run the boats, could they, on 
the Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; not very well. You see, I do not know whether 
the shipowners really understand the bill, because it has been rather 
peculiar to me to find people who are quite willing, in view of the 
fact that there is a tremendous oversupply of seamen at the present 
time, to risk the safety of their property and the lives of the people 
on board, who are patrons, with unskilled men, when they have an 
immense supply of skilled men to draw from. I can hardly believe 
that the shipowner really understands that part of the bill, because I 
do not think- 

Mr. Scott. What is there in the bill that compels him to take other 
than able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. It says right here: “ Provided , That on the Great 
Lakes on their connecting waters certificated lifeboat men may be 
used in lieu of able seamen.” 

Mr. Scott. “May be used,” but not shall. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not say they must use them. 

Mr. Scott. You said a moment ago, if I understood you—and I 
certainly do not want to misquote you—that you could not under- 


240 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

stand why the operators on the Great Lakes wanted a law which 
would compel them to use incompetent men in the operation of their 
ships. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think you got my answer correctly, or 
maybe I did not get your question properly if I answered like that. 
But I want to say this: That the able seaman can be eliminated by 
this clause. 

Mr. Scott. In other words, the law provides this: At the present 
time if your ship goes into the dock at one of our Lake ports, a pas¬ 
senger ship, with somebody dying on board, and one of your sailors 
gets sore at the captain or sore at an officer, and he leaves the ship at 
the dock, under the law that ship can not leave the dock until the 
captain gets an able seaman on board. This bill provides in that 
event, or in a like emergency—not class legislation—that the operator 
of the ship may use a certificated lifeboat man in lieu of an able 
seaman. 

Mr. O’Brien. Pardon me. I do not like to question the statement 
of any Congressman, and maybe I am dense- 

Mr. Scott. Maybe you are and maybe we are. 

Mr. O’Brien. 1 say maybe I am. I am not a lawyer, and bills 
are strange things to me, and in order that I may be clear on the 
question, isn’t it a fact that to the shipowner is left the right to judge 
whether he shall have able seamen or unskilled men ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes—not unskilled men—he has to get skilled men on 
board of his ship, and he has those. The particular application of 
this law—you heard the testimony yesterday; you were here. The 
D. & C. people said even before they had any law at all—and you do 
not controvert it—they had able seamen on their ships. You have 
got to have able seamen on the ships. That is a condition over which 
there ought not to be a law. You could not pass a law that the sun 
shall shine, because it is going to shine anyhow. That is a condi¬ 
tion that is natural. 

Mr. O’Brien. But this is not a natural law; this is a man-made law. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; this is a man-made law, and we insist it is a man¬ 
made law applying to natural conditions that are not compatible 
with its enforcement. That is the point. 

Mr. O’Brien. The question is whether this will be compatible or 
not. 

Mr. Scott. It has been before, because if you put my bill into 
effect it will in some measure return to the conditions that existed 
prior to the passage of the La Follette Act. 

Mr. O’Brien. Which was that there were no able seamen.* The 
only men that ever received any examination were the men who were 
in the unions, who were examined as to their qualifications. Those 
were the only men on the Great Lakes who received an examination. 
Now, I do not think it is fair to say that there were able seamen on 
the Great Lakes before. There were men known as wheelsmen; 
there were men known as watchmen; but the only thing they had to 
go on was whatever examination we were capable of giving to the 
men in order that we might have some way as a guide to the men who 
are trusting their lives to the men who work with them. You must 
understand it does not only mean those men are going to lower boats, 
but those men are at the mastheads, and anybody who may be sitting 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 241 

in a chair at the bottom of the mast is at the mercy of the man who 
lowers them. If he does not know how to do it, he is liable to drop 
that man from the masthead. Consequently, the seaman tries to see 
that the fellow who is working with him has as much skill as he can 
possibly have. 

Then the men have to paint the ships all over, despite the fact 
they do not have anything to do. You know Mr. Davidson said the 
seamen have nothing to do when the ship gets into port. I have sailed 
a great many years- 

Mr. Scott. How many times did you paint the Tionesta during the 
time you were on her ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I had to paint her all over. 

Mr. Scott. During the season ? 

Mr. O’Brien. During the season. 

Mr. Scott. At what time during the season ? 

Mr. O’Brien. You know, in the first place, the Tionesta is usually 
painted in the spring- 

Mr. Scott. Why, sure. 

Mr. O’Brien. But paint rubs off, through collisions, rubbing along 
the docks, and things like that. The passenger-boat owners are much 
more particular as to the looks of their ships than the owners of the 
freight ships are, and the consequence is that you are continually 
patching up. And not only that, but you scrub every morning; you 
scrub the paint work. You know very well the pride of the shipowner 
is in the cleanliness of his ship. Not only do our people do that work, 
but our people work, we men on board the ship, and you can not keep 
a ship clean, with thousands of people trafficking to and fro on those 
ships, unless you do the work at the time the people are on shore. 
And that is the only time you can do it, when the ships are at the dock. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me go back and try to straighten up one thing. 
The seamen’s bill required that of the deck crew there should be 65 
per cent able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, this bill, in the proviso in line 8, page 4, says: 

Provided, That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters certificated 
lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. So that that proviso leaves to the boat owner the privi¬ 
lege, if he desires to do it, of doing away with every able seaman 
and using only certificated lifeboat men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the whole thing in a nutshell. 

Mr. Gahn. But as a matter of practice they do not do it. 

Mr. Hardy. As a matter of practice they do not do it, but this bill 
will permit them to do it. 

Mr. Gahn. They ought not to do it. 

Mr. Hardy. If they ought not to do it, then this bill ought not to 
have that in here. 

Mr. Scott. If you will permit this suggestion: Before the La Fol- 
lette Act went into effect the phraseology that I carry in my amend¬ 
ment constituted what law there was. You saw fit and your col¬ 
leagues saw fit to put on the statute books legislation which corn- 

48420—21-16 


242 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

pelled the acceptance of a certain percentage of individuals, and you 
specified what they were. Now, up in my country on short runs— 
and I insist and have insisted all along that I am only aiming to meet 
the situation because on the Great Lakes there are only short runs— 
a man has to get an able seaman on there, and it is not necessary, at 
all. There are only three boats, the Tionesta —and_Mr. O’Brien 
happened to be on that boat—the Octarara , and the Juniata , that run 
from Buffalo to Duluth, which is a long run. 

Mr. Hardy. Before that law passed there was no law in the United 
States that required any kind of manning of a vessel. There was an 
inspection service that had to wrestle with the boat owners as to what 
kind of crew they should put on, but no law defining what an able 
seaman was and no law requiring any number of able seamen. We 
debated it here for two or three years and had everybody testify as 
to how many able seamen there ought to be, and then we incorporated 
that requirement in the law. They said able seamen were scarce, 
and so in, the requirement for the first year we made it 40 per cent; 
for the next year, 45 per cent; for the next year, 50 per cent; for the 
next year, 55 per cent; and then for the next year, 65 per cent—giving 
them all that time for the education of able seamen, so that by vary¬ 
ing the percentages and increasing them gradually the bill could be 
complied with. And we required under the bill that the deck crew 
should have so many able seamen. Now, this bill does away with it 
and says they can have anybody. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; that is true. 

Mr. Scott. Was not that true under the La Follette bill? 

Mr. Hardy. There was a great deal of complaint about safety. 

Mr. Scott. There was no complaint on the Lakes. Do you recall 
any testimony to that effect on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. Hardy. I recall testimony — whenever we get into this discus¬ 
sion as to safety you have a string of testimony showing it is safer 
to be on the Lakes than for a man to be in his own bed or in his own 
home. But if you do not want any requirements to protect ships 
and the lives of people on ships at sea, if you do not want any skill, 
then you ought to have this bill. 

Mr. Mills. What I am trying to get at is wherein in calling a man 
an able seaman you protect life at sea. Now, I have asked this wit¬ 
ness to tell us what the average duties are. He tells me they paint 
the ship. That does not protect life at sea. He says they keep the 
ship clean; they have to splice ropes; when the ship comes into port 
they have to tie up. We have all seen that done. Now, wherein 
does this man, during those three years on a modern passenger vessel, 
ever perform the duties which directly affect the safety of a vessel? 
1 would like to have that. 

Mr. O’Brien. When I was talking of the qualifications of the able 
seaman, in answer to your question, I said that there were a great 
number of things that an able seaman had to know in order to be 
capable of qualifying as an able seaman. 

Mr. Mills. Let us confine ourselves to those affecting the safety 
of a ship. 

Mr. O’Brien. It is right there [indicating]. 

Mr. Mills. Will you answer the question? 

Mr. O’Brien. You have it right in front of you, I think. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 243 

Mr. Mills. I would like to get your opinion of it. 

Mr. O Brien. He has to be able to steer the ship; he has to be able 
to splice lines- 

Mr. Mills. Yes; the steering of a ship would have to do with 
safety. Then I would like to know, for my own information, does 
every able seaman steer the ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; he is supposed to. 

Mr. Mills. From the able seamen you do not select a particular 
group as wheelsmen, do you ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Some men prefer to sail as wheelsmen. It is not our 
fault they are segregated. 

Mr. Mills. I am asking you whether there is a particular group 
selected. This is to bring out the information. 

Mr. O’Brien. Now, we must serve on board of the ship in the posi¬ 
tions in which the shipowner and the ship officers desire us to, or else 
we will be insubordinate. Consequently when we go on board of the 
ship we have not a right to go up to the master and say, “ I am going 
to be wheelsman,” or “ I am going to be watchman,” or “ I am going 
to steer so many hours, and we will all steer in our turn.” We are 
not supposed to be in a position to do that. That would mean we 
are taking charge of the ship, and the discipline spoken of by the 
shipowners would really be in danger. Consequently, when the cap¬ 
tain or the mate says to the man, “ You serve as wheelsman; you serve 
as watchman or you serve as lookout man; you serve as able sea¬ 
man,” that means that certain men are put in positions as quarter¬ 
masters, as we call them. 

Now, on the Great Lakes last year, for the first time in the history 
of the Lakes, the inspection service came up and issued these orders, 
that able seamen shall serve as wheelsmen and watchmen, and the 
others are eliminated. It was the first time the 65 per cent went 
into effect, practically speaking. The result was that every one of 
those men who went on board as able seamen had to be qualified as 
wheelsman and to take his trick at the wheel. 

Mr. Mills. When was that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Last year. Those are the orders, and the inspection 
papers of the vessel owners read so if there was any segregation 
afterwards it was outside of the jurisdiction of the inspectors and 
seemed to show it was brought about by the officers or owners. I 
do not know as to that. But I do know the inspection service issued 
those orders last year. 

Mr. Mills. Now, let me go on with this other proposition. You 
have mentioned steering the vessel, which obviously requires skill; 
but it won’t require 65 per cent of the deck crew to man the wheel ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Mills. Aside from steering the vessel, what other duties does 
the able seaman perform that directly affect the safety of the ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. He must have a knowledge of the weights on tackles. 
That knowledge in itself means a lot. It means that he must ac¬ 
quire a knowledge of the weight that ropes can stand. There is no 
way of acquiring that knowledge except through actual practice. 

Mr. Mills. Now, where do you use those ropes? 

Mr. O’Brien. We use them every day. 

Mr. Mills. You use them every day? How do you use the ropes 
on the steamship every day at sea? 


244 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. You do not use them every day at sea; but you do 
not know when you are going to be called upon to use anything. 

Mr. Mills. You use them to tie up, don’t you? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have been at sea, Congressman, on a ship that had 
not carried sail for 13 years, and because of that fact, that she had 
not carried sail for 13 years, the conclusion arrived at by the owner 
and officers of the ship, although they have a place for the sails, 
was that they would not be used any more. The consequence was 
that they stored them away down below in the lower hold, altogether. 
For 13 years that ship run without carrying sail. But she went on 
the tail end of the banks and lost her rudder and propeller, and we 
were called upon again to bring back the skill we used to have, 
outside of the skill of the steamboat man, because of having sailed 
these sailing ships, and we were called upon to go up those masts 
with axes to cut away the paint that had accumulated on the trav¬ 
elers, and then to bend the sails on that ship again; we were called 
upon to build three jury rudders that weighed 5 tons, and to erect 
tackles that would lift those things off the deck and put them over 
the stern—on the sea, mind you. 

Mr. Scott. On the ocean? 

Mr. O’Brien. On the ocean; yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. I will concede all that is skilled work. 

Mr. O’Brien. It is able seaman’s work. 

Mr. Mills. Of course, it is; but that was an emergency. It does 
not answer the point I am trying to get at. I am not trjdng to tie 
you up; I am trying to get information. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am trying to give it to you, Congressman. 

Mr. Mills. What I want to know is how is the skill acquired dur¬ 
ing the ordinary service of three years, as so-called able seamen, on 
the part of the deck crew? You have mentioned the steering as one 
of the common duties. That requires skill. What are the others? 

Mr. O’Brien. The others are along the same lines I have been 
talking about. Men must put in new gear; men must repair the 
gear—the men that repair the gear on board of the ship. 

Mr. Mills. Just what kind of gear? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am talking about the rigging on the ship. 

Mr. Mills. How much rigging is there on the ordinary ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There is sufficient- 

Mr. Mills. On a steamship? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. There is sufficient rigging on board of the 
ordinary steamship to giv3 any man a complete education in splicing. 
Now, that is one. He must acquire, as I said before, a knowledge of 
the strength of lines in order to be able to handle the ship. 

Mr. Mills. Don’t you use standard lines on those ships? 

Mr. O’Brien. Standard lines? 

Mr. Mills. Yes. In other words, when you tie up you don’t have 
to determine each time you tie up to the dock the weight of rope 
you are going to use; your rope is there and the able seaman ties up 
to the dock with it, doesn’t he? It is not left to his discretion to 
determine what rope to use, is it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, you do not always put into the 
dock at the same speed. And another thing, whether we like these 
things or not, we must acknowledge it is upon the able seamen to 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 245 

determine whether the rope is going to carry the weight, because he 
is the man to handle the rope, and he is attended also by an ordinary 
seaman. And where the ordinary seaman does it alone, the able sea¬ 
man must be there to watch, and he is. 

Mr. Mills. He does that by throwing the rope? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not throwing the rope. 

Mr. Mills. Or handling the rope, either? 

Mr. O’Brien. The able seaman handles the back spring. That is 
the rope that ordinarily stops the ship. The ordinary seaman is at 
another rope that does not get the exact amount of weight that the 
able seaman’s rope is called upon to bear. It is not of as great im¬ 
portance in stopping the ship and the mooring of the ship as the line 
this man is handling. The consequence is, in handling the lighter 
line, that skill is derived in that way eventually. He might break 
three or four lines before he acquires the skill. I have known fellows 
who lost their legs before the}' acquired the skill, and the poor 
fellows, of course, never got the skill. That was in the days before 
they had to have three years on board ship before they were qualified 
as able seamen. 

Mr. Scott. Will you let me ask you a question? We will bring it 
right down to actual cases, rather than a general proposition. We 
will assume an able seaman is in charge of the aft line; the boat is 
making a landing at the dock. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr, Scott. And he is supposed, under your statement, to have 
knowledge as to whether that line will hold ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; he is. 

Mr. Scott. Where does he get his orders from as to whether he 
shall slack or hold fast? Does he take his own judgment and let 
go of his line, or slack his line, or does he get his orders from the 
mate up on the bridge, or up above him on the afterdeck, saying 
let go; slack your aft line; make tight ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I will have to qualify my answer, of course. 

Mr. Scott. I guess so; I thought you would. 

Mr. O’Brien. No; if you ask me does he receive orders to tie the 
ship up, I will say yes. Or if you ask me does he receive orders to 
slack the ship, or let go of the rope, I will say yes. But when it 
comes to a question of stopping that ship, if the captain or mate is 
a wise man, he is not going to say when you shall hold or when you 
shall slack; because a great amount of the knowledge of stopping the 
ship at the right moment comes from the man who is actually 
handling the rope; just the same as two men can not steer the ship 
at the same time. 

It is a fact the captain might be giving orders, but he gives orders 
to the wheelsman usually on the way into port to port her one-half 
or starboard five-eighths. He starboards his wheel. But the cap¬ 
tain does not tell him how much wheel he is going to put on that slap 
to get the one-eighth of that point. He knows immediately that when 
he starts to tell him how to put the wheel, that there is a conflict 
of opinion and the man loses confidence in himself and the ship 
goes off two or three points. The wise captain refrains from doing 
anything like that, and as result the wheelsman has the confidence 
in himself and gives the ship the necessary amount of helm and stops 


246 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

her right on the point in the same manner as when he is docking the 
vessel. The weight of the vessel is on the line. He has the angle on 
lines that the captain on the bridge would have as to whether the 
line was about to part, which would be a matter of looking, and that 
would give the captain the knowledge that the line had just parted. 
The strands would go, and the moment the strand goes the whole 
line is gone. If you do not keep your line taut and allow it to burr 
and surge as it comes along and to surge suddenly and slack coming, 
you are going to part your line if you do those things. 

All those things are in the running incidents of the ship, and that 
is the reason that I say that I am amazed at the attitude of the ship¬ 
owner outside of the saving of life. I am sure there is no ship¬ 
owner who would want anything done that would jeopardize the 
lives of the passengers that are on board these ships, because it means 
a dropping off of all passenger service if anything like that occurs; 
and not only that but because of humane reasons, I do not think that 
the shipowners are actuated by a desire to drown anybody, and if 
they attempt to examine this bill as it is, I think they will be with 
me and against the bill themselves, because, really, gentlemen, that 
bill spells disaster for the shipowner. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Great Lakes—I don’t know about the ocean— 
did you ever hear of the snapping or breaking of a line that lost 
passengers’ lives? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did not say passengers’ lives. I said the man’s life 
that was handling the rope. I have known men that lost their legs 
due to snapping the line. Here is what we call the timber heads 
that made the ship fast. We take our line here [indicating] the 
line parts at the timber heads at the shore where the strain gets 
greatest on the line. The line, as a rule, does not part in the middle. 
It parts where there is a pressure greater than the amount of pres¬ 
sure in the middle, consequently the line is so much weaker. If it 
parts and you are standing here that line spreads around, and any¬ 
thing that it catches is going to go. Men have had their legs torn off. 

Mr. Gahn. Do not the able seamen get caught and injured? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; that is true. Of course they do. There are 
times when nobody can stop the ship. There are times when no mat¬ 
ter what line you hold, that happens, but I am speaking of the skill 
in the ordinary terms. 

Mr. Gahn. This law has not saved anybody from being injured 
with these ropes, has it? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; it has; by stating that men shall have a cer¬ 
tain amount of service before they are qualified as able seamen and 
because able seamen, as a rule, are handling lines. 

Mr. Gahn. Has any able seamen been injured since this law went 
into effect? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not say as to that. I do not mean to convey 
the impression that the law wipes out all accidents. It does not. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean to convey the impression that there is likely 
to be more accidents if you have not got skilled men than if there 
are not. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is what I mean. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Great Lakes, were there more injured before 
1919 than since on account of this act? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 247 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you; I have not kept track of any 
accidents on the Lakes; in fact it would be impossible for me to do 
that. 

Mr. Jefferis. Do I understand you to say that on the Great Lakes 
there were no able seamen before the passage of this law? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; they were known as wheelmen, watchmen, 
deckhands, and coal passers. 

Mr. Jefferis. As a matter of fact we did not have that designation 
in the law, able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not in the sense that the law calls attention 
to it. 

Mr. Jefferis. How could they run the boats before this law was 
passed if they did not have able seamen? Did they not have boats 
on the Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; they did. The only examination, as I said be¬ 
fore, that was given was the examination given by the unions, and 
that was the skill required. We were not called able seamen. 

Mr. Jefferis. It does not matter what you were called. I do not 
care about names and designations. They must have had somebody 
who knew how to run boats on the Lakes before this law was passed. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; I did not get your question. 

Mr. Jefferis. Were they competent men to run boats on the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. Some were; some were not. 

Mr. Jefferis. Did they lose many people, passengers, or have many 
accidents before this law was passed or not? 

Mr, O’Brien. They had quite a lot of accidents. I think it was 
because of the numerous accidents that the law was passed. 

Mr. Jefferis. Where did they have those accidents? How many 
people were lost? 

Mr. O’Brien. There were at one time 900 lives lost in the harbor 
of New York. 

Mr. Jefferis. That was not on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. O’Brien. This was in the harbor. 

Mr. Jefferis. I am talking about what this law applies to. 

Mr. O’Brien. I think the Eastland went down at the dock in Chi¬ 
cago and drowned a considerable number. 

Mr. Chindblom. You mean to say that it was due to any neglect 
in manning with seamen? 

Mr. Scott. When did she go down? 

Mr. Gahn. She went down in 1916, since this law went into effect. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not in 1916. 

Mr. Gahn. When did she go down? 

Mr. O’Brien. In 1914. 

Mr. Scott. 1915. 

Mr. Gahn. This law was in effect then. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not until November, 1915. 

Mr. Jefferis. Did you serve on the Great Lakes before this law 
went into effect? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; I did. 

Mr. Jefferis. For what number of years? 

Mr. O’Brien. For about eight years. 

Mr. Jefferis. Actually on a ship? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; actually on a ship up to that time. 


248 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Jefferis. What were you employed as and who employed you 
before this law went into effect. 

Mr. O’Brien. I was employed as a wheelsman and as a watchman. 
I brought my skill with me from the ocean. 

Mr. Jefferis. Did the owners of the vessel employ you without 
the law requiring them to do it or not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Did it compel them to employ me ? 

Mr. Jefferis. I say they did voluntarily. 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course they did; yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. During those eight years that you actually served on 
the Lakes before this law was passed, did your crews suffer any loss 
of passengers? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; I can not say that they did. 

Mr. Jefferis. Then the owners, during those eight years, must 
have selected competent men to run their boats, did they not? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would hardly say that. 

Mr. Jefferis. You considered yourself competent, did you not? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did; yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. How were the rest of the crew ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think that they were quite up to what they 
would be termed competent. I do not think they were. 

Mr. Jefferis. Since the passage of this law have you acquired any 
additional skill than what you had when you served for eight years 
before the law was passed? 

Mr. O’Brien. I will have to answer that at length. We have a cer¬ 
tain amount of skill on the Great Lakes since this seamen’s bill was 
passed, for this reason, that the bill compels men to serve as ordinary 
seamen, before they can be able seamen, 18 months on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Jefferis. I was asking about your own personal experience, 
rather than about the others that you have educated. I am asking if 
you gathered any new skill ? 

Mr. O’Brien. If I gathered any new skill ? 

Mr. Jefferis. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; a sailor is always learning, unless he is very 
foolish; then a man ceases to learn. 

Mr. Jefferis. Was it on account of the law or on account of your 
adaptability to acquire skill ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; on account of necessity. 

Mr. Jefferis. Necessity? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. Then, if there had been no law, necessity might have 
induced you to acquire that skill or not. Did the law require that? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is perfectly true. Necessity may have induced- 
me to acquire that skill, but I do not think that we want to be bound 
to necessity. I know that I would not like to be, and the reason we 
are objecting to this bill is because of the fact that it will make it a 
necessity. Necessity will be the only reason. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Have you any objections to the provisions of the 
bill to reduce the number of these short lines ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Conway, who is a fireman, can answer that. 

Mr. Chindblom. The abie seamen who are now working on the 
Great Lakes have been certified as such, all of them? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 





AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 249 


Mr. Chindblom. Would you say that all of them are competent? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would not. 

Mr. Chindblom. So that the same rule would apply even with the 
law and regulations or any restrictions that would apply without 
such laws and regulations as to the good and real competent men; it 
depends a great deal on the individual, does it not? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. 

Mr. Chindblom. You do not think it depends on the individual? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; to a certain extent. Yes; of course. There are 
individuals who are a little broader than others, but take them as a 
whole the} ,r are about on a par. Men. as a rule, do not excel in all 
positions, anyhow. If they were remarkably brilliant they would not 
be going to. sea. 

Mr. Chindblom. I do not agree with you. 

Mr. O’Brien. You do not agree with me? 

Mr. Chindblom. I do not agree with you. I think there are men 
who like the sea. There was a time once if my lines had run that 
way I would have gone to sea. 

Mr. O’Brien. There are thousands like you to-day. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is because they like the sea. It is not because 
they are not having the opportunities to acquire skill. 

Mr. O’Brien. On that question about the liking of the sea there 
are thousands and thousands of young men surrounding the Lakes. 
There are, I think, eight States surrounding the Lakes which should 
be the breeding ground of the American merchant marine, because 
from there you get the actual Americans. Those men come to the 
Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. In order to be seamen there have to be ships. 

Mr. O’Brien. If I will be allowed I will show you what happens 
to them. They come to the Lakes every season and are welcomed 
into our organization without any skill at all and shipped in the 
capacity of ordinary seamen in order to give them the opportunity 
to acquire the skill necessary to make them able seamen. They go 
on board those ships; thousands of them go into the Lake Carrier’s 
Association ships and the conditions faced under the law which is 
not being enforced are so bad that the turnover for seven months is 
700 per cent for these men who have a liking for the sea and come 
and are disillusioned. The conditions on board of the ships that 
we are now getting would become worse than by trying to pass this 
bill. I said that the turnover to-day is 700 per cent on board those 
ships, and we are going to reduce the watches to two watches and 
give these men the 84 hours. I do not want to speak on that matter, 
because it is a firemen’s question. I do not want our men to come 
here with a liking for the sea. Whatever reason may be assigned 
for that I do not know, and I am not going into it, but the liking 
is there and these men come and they serve a month, a week, or two 
weeks, and they disappear; they say there is nothing in it for us. 
The conditions are no good. It is true we are accused of having 
wonderful conditions, but the fact remains that the conditions are 
so good that the men do not remain on the ships; they are driven 
from the ships, and there is to-day a 700 per cent turnover in the 
ordinary seamen’s department. 

Mr. Chindblom. But there is a surplusage of able seamen to-day, 
is there not? 


250 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. There is because of the fact that the vast majority, 
I think, there are 60 to 70 of the boats laid up, and I have heard’ 
Mr. Davidson say here that only about 18,000,000 tons of iron ore 
was carried down this year, consequently that will mean cutting 
in half practically the amount of men required. Now I want to say 
this also, that there has been a great lot of testimony submitted here 
as to why the seamen’s bill should be eliminated altogether or certain 
sections of it repealed, and as reasons for that were given the fact 
that ships were not running this year. Now, in 1914 and 1913 and 
1912 and 1908 we had more ships tied up than we have even to-day 
tied up to a brick wall, and the great bulk of the freighters on the 
Lakes were without anything for them to do. 

Not one cent was being paid to the shipowners who could run their 
boats at that price, and the result was that the ships did not sail and 
the seamen’s act was not there in 1908. 

The year of what we termed the open ship was in existence on the 
Lakes, and the shipper did not work with her. 

Mr. Scott. You are talking about the freighters now. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am speaking of the ships in 1908 and the seamen’s 
act had not passed or was not thought about in 1908. In 1907 we 
had what on the Lakes? We had a 100 per cent organization on the 
Lakes, and the seamen’s union has been created right here in the testi¬ 
mony of some of the witnesses that its birth came about with the 
passage of the seamen’s act, where in reality, gentlemen, we had 
almost 100 per cent organization from the year 1900 up to 1908 of 
the lines in the seamen’s organization, and to-day we have not got 100 
per cent. We have about 70 per cent organization, and the vast 
bulk of the ships are run on the Great Lakes on what is termed the 
open ship to-day, and it is well known what that term means, because 
if we are known as a union man we are not given an opportunity to 
sail on those ships. I did not want to bring that question in, because 
I do not believe that the seamen’s act has anything to do with the 
seamen’s organization. The seamen’s act was passed primarily for 
the purpose of saving lives and presumably property at sea, but 
especially lives. The seamen’s union is interested in the saving of 
life. 

Mr. Gahn. How many lives have been saved on the Great Lakes by 
this act you are talking about? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you that. 

Mr. Gahn. Has it saved any? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. 

Mr. Free, What conditions do you complain of most? 

Mr. O’Brien. Living conditions. 

Mr. Free, A moment ago you said there was a turnover of 700 
per cent owing to the conditions. What conditions ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The law specifically says that watch and watch 
shall be shipping at sea. We are told that we are capable of forcing 
any condition that we want. On board the Lake Carriers’ Associa¬ 
tion ships the conditions are exactly reversed. The deck hands work 
all day at sea and are watch and watch when they come into port. 
That is one reason why the deck hand or the ordinary seaman does 
not remain on ships. Another thing is that there has never been 
one penny paid to these men in cases of fines in the seamen’s law, 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 251 

where the law says that shall work, because of the fact that they 
are up against the (greatest combination of capital that the world has 
ever known—the United States Steel Corporation. They have no 
chance. They are there, and if they say anything they are told to 
hit the dock, and young Americans are young Americans, and they 
stand up for their rights when they can, and they try to stand for 
them whenever they know they are going to be deprived of the 
opportunity to earn a livelihood. That is the reason you have the 
turnover. They are herded into two assembly rooms, so-called, for 
the purpose of shipping. You must give a dollar to the shipmaster 
inside the assembly room, and therein you get a card from them 
stating that you are so and so, if you are an able seaman, a certificate, 
and the dollar goes to the Lake Carriers’ Association. I do not 
recall about the amount of money, but I do know that the Shipping 
Board issued orders that that thing should cease, and the Shipping 
Board orders were not recognized. 

Mr. Free. What did that dollar go for? What did they use it 
for? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know what they used it for. 

Mr. Chindblom. Who got it? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Ship Owners’ Association. 

Mr. Scott. You are speaking of the Steel Trust? The Steel Trust 
is not urging my bill. 

Mr. O’Brien. But your bill applies to the Steel Trust. 

Mr. Scott. No. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; it does. Does this bill mean only passenger 
boats ? 

Mr. Scott. It means only the passenger-boat service. 

Mr. O’Brien. I can not recall what it is meant for; I only know 
what it will do. I know what this bill means to us. 

Mr. Scott. That helps to increase the traffic on the Great Lakes 
where it has been going down ever since this law was passed. I do 
not care whether it helps the trust or not. I want it to help my 
people. 

The statement is made in order to get the record clear that the 
La Follette Seamen’s Act became operative in March, 1915. 

Mr. O’Brien. I think you will find that the bill became effective 
in November, 1915. 

Mr. Briggs. Eight months after its passage, March 4, 1916. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it true that tonnage on the Great Lakes has been 
decreasing ever since 1915? 

Mr. O’Brien. The tonnage on the Great Lakes has decreased a 
great deal. 

Mr. Hardy. Has increased or decreased? 

Mr. O’Brien. Increased, but the number of ships have decreased. 

Mr. Hardy. How about the tonnage they have been carrying; 
have they lost ever since 1915 on these lakes every year? I do not 
know; I am just asking for accurate information. 

Mr. O’Brien. To show you how much the passenger boats have 
been affected, I am going to read a question that I asked of Mr. 
Thorp in the last hearing on a bill similar to this one introduced by 
Mr. Scott: 

Mr. O’Brien. Is it not a fact that last season you had the best season you 
ever had in the history of the Lakes, which is an admitted fact by Mr. Leckie 


252 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 


and by the vessel owners on the Great Lakes, that last season was the best sea¬ 
son financially—that is, the season of 1919—that they have ever had in the 
history of the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Thorp. What is the point about that? 

Mr. O’Brien. The point is everybody had a lot of business and made a lot of 
money, and the point was raised here we were putting them out of business. 

Mr. Thorp. We had an exceptional season of weather, Mr. O’Brien; weather 
we have never had before in 20 years. 

I do not know whether the question or point was that the weather 
last year was not as good as the weather in 1919, but it certainly was 
not because of the seamen’s act that the business was dropping off. 

Mr. Hardy. Do I understand from that that the year 1919 was an 
exceptionally good year for your company on the Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Admittedly the best in the history of the passenger 
boat association, by the passenger boat owners themselves following 
that conference with us. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that quotation before this committee that you are 
reading from? What is that? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am reading from the hearings on the Scott bill. 

Mr. Hardy. Before this committee ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Before the subcommittee of 1920, and that is Mr. 
Thorp’s answer. Now, I was surprised to hear that after he had made 
a statement such as that the the seamen’s bill was responsible for the 
destruction of the business on the Lakes; in fact, gentlemen, as I said 
there, I was wondering what the seamen’s bill had not destroyed. 

Mr. Free. Is it a fact, in your judgment, that on this particular 
run, where the extra men are carried, that really has nothing to do 
with it? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never been on any ship that I was given any 
time outside of my watch below. In fact, prior to the passage of this 
bill I was not even sure of my watch below. I will give you an in¬ 
stance. Talk about the weather conditions on the Great Lakes. Out¬ 
side of Milwaukee, in 1919—this is Lake Michigan, supposedly the 
most placid lake on the chain of Lakes—I was on board of one of 
Mr. Davidson’s ships, who testified here yesterday—the Rappahan¬ 
nock— and I went below. I was on deck from 12 o’clock that night 
to 6 o’clock in the morning, and I had gone below and had my break¬ 
fast and had just turned in when it started to snow. We turned 
around because of the fact that we could not find the harbor be¬ 
cause of the snow. You could not see far enough to* discover the 
entrance to the harbor. The consequence was that we had to face 
the sea and fight it. This is the question before the shipowners. 
No matter how good your ships may be, the fact remains that when 
you have got to fight the sea you must have knowledge as to how to 
fight it. 

We had to turn around and had a barge with 6,000 tons of ore 
astern of us. It is true that after we had turned around a couple 
of hours later we could have let go of the barge and let the people 
in the barge drown and get into Milwaukee ourselves, because the 
weather cleared up, but as the weather cleared the wind and sea in¬ 
creased until it was so great that we could not risk turning around 
the ship in the trough of the sea or her seams would have opened 
and filled with water and we would have gone down. So the ques¬ 
tion with us was to keep her head into the sea, as well as to hold the 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 253 

barge, with her 11 people on board, up to the sea also. The barge 
was loaded down to the decks. The sea made one complete roll, just 
the same as this table right across it. There was nothing to break 
it except one solitary rail, a little heavier than this long timber. 
The result was that we fought the sea in that ship for 12 hours 
that day. I was on deck practically from 12 o’clock, and was on 
deck all of that time until 6 o’clock in the evening; and, by the way, 
i wished that Mr. Davidson had remained, because the captain of 
that ship was his cousin and the mate on that ship was his cousin. 
Unfortunately, the mate is now dead, having drowned two or three 
years ago along the placid waters of the Great Lakes. His ship went 
down at the same time and he went down with it and his son also. 
At 6 o’clock in the evening the captain called me to him and he said 
go back and tell the engineer that we are going to try to turn around. 
The firemen at that time were working in that ship four on and eight 
off. There were three firemen on it, but the deck hands and ordinary 
seamen at that time were working, coal passing, and on deck, and 
vice versa. When they came into port the deck hands worked as coal 
passers. They worked them all the time, and there was no question 
of how and when they could work them. 

There was nothing said in the law about those men. They worked 
them until they dropped, and when they dropped they got new men 
if conditions were such as to g.et the men; if men wanted to get 
passage from one port to another, they earned wages sufficient by 
saving their passage money. The ordinary seamen did not last long 
on these jobs. The three coal passers were down with the three 
firemen getting steam up on the ship. There is 5 feet of water in 
the hold and eventually she managed to turn around, and when we 
got into dock or into Milwaukee the barge just got into the river, 
when she went down with the people that were on it. Of course, 
the river is shallow and the barge struck the bottom before her 
decks were submerged. The consequence was that nobody was 
drowned. But on board of that ship that I am speaking about there 
were qualified men who knew their business, and who, when the time 
came for the emergency, were there to stand up without any officer 
chasing them, because the men were standing up, and the captain 
said, “ I want to give credit to the men here.” I was on top of the 
pilot house from 12 o’clock at night until 10.30 o’clock the following 
morning, when the deck started to freeze over. That was on the 22d 
day of November, 1909. We got into Milwaukee at half past 10 that 
night, and it was my watch again at 12 o’clock, so I had a 30-hour 
trick to stand on deck. Of course, I had no right to say, “Well, I 
have been working so long; I have had so much time, can I not go to 
sleep ? ” There were no men, as I heard the captain say, that were 
capable of taking my place, no men to sound the ship, and to see that 
the pumps were running, because we were liable to go down even 
inside that harbor. 

I point these things out to show you the qualifications that are 
necessary for men when it comes to saving life at sea. We do not 
know what emergency might arise at any moment. Nobody ever 
dreamed that the Eastland would capsize in the Chicago Biver. . She 
did. Nobody ever thought of it. Nobody ever thought that within 
4 miles of the Canadian shore the Empress of Ireland would sink 


254 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

and so many lives be lost. But these accidents occurred and people 
are drowned, and I think that it is to everybody’s advantage to see 
that laws are made and kept that will prevent any possibility of the 
recurrence of disasters we have had in the past. 

To go back to the Slocum , the Slocum disaster in New York Har¬ 
bor, where 900 people were drowned, and the conditions in New 
York Harbor are not in any way comparable when it comes to the 
question of the weather on Saginaw Bay, which is known as the 
graveyard of the Lakes. In New York Harbor the water is placid. 
There is every opportunity there for the beaching of boats. 

Mr. Scott. The Slocum burned up. 

Mr. O’Brien. I know she did. Other boats will burn the same 
as the Slocum. The possibilities for these disasters remain. Why 
then should we seek to remove the possibilities of saving life on 
board the ship by putting into this bill the proviso that the skilled 
men may be taken olf and replaced by unskilled men ? 

Mr. Scott. Will you name one passenger boat in the history of the 
United States that has ever gone down in Saginaw Bay? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. 

Mr. Scott. You know you don’t because there never has been. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. 

Mr. Scott. I am telling you I do know. You do not know; that is 
the unfortunate thing. 

Mr. O’Brien. There is a possibility that there might be a boat go 
down; boats have sunk there. 

Mr. Scott. You mention two of them that sunk, and a boat that 
you mentioned, the Bradley , was 40 years old. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. An old wooden tub, carrying 100 per cent life-saving 
appliances at the time she went down, lifeboats and rafts, etc. And 
Saginaw Bay is not the only place called a sailors’ graveyard. 
Nearly every harbor on the Great Lakes somebody calls that. 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, no. I am not trying to tell the Congressmen 
anything that is not so. 

Mr. Scott. I do not think you are. 

Mr. O’Brien. If there is anything that could in any way flavor 
my testimony that was not true, I would be the first to move to 
strike it out. 

I do not know that I stated that I am not any longer an officer 
of the organization. I am a sailor and I am interested directly in 
this saving of life. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean to say the weather is any worse on the 
16th day of September than on the 15th ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I would not say it is anything better. 

Mr. Scott. Is it any worse? 

Mr. O’Brien. It might be. 

Mr. Scott. The only storm you have told about was in June that 
was a real storm. 

Mr. O’Brien. I have told you about October. You are talking 
about going into October, removing the whole of the thing and 
having the thing run to the end of the navigation season. In Sep¬ 
tember, 1913, in one night there were 250 lives lost in and about 
Saginaw Bay, when one of these ships was lost. It was a great big 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 255 

ship, very cold, turned completely over, and the air inside the cham¬ 
bers of the ship did not have opportunity to escape, and the steam¬ 
ships floated bottom up on the chain of lakes. 

Mr. Scott. How much life equipment did they have ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I can not recall the life equipment. I am talking 
about the possibility of storms. I am trying to answer you about 
weather conditions. 

Mr. Scott. I hope your statement with respect to that will be 
more accurate than the balance of that testimony. 

Mr. O’Brien. I will give you the name of the ship. 

Mr. Scott. Because the accident did not occur on Saginaw Bay. 
It occurred about 18 miles from Saginaw Bay, and it was almost 
a tidal wave that came along; an unusual experience—never hap¬ 
pened before or since. We have had but one Galveston storm, and if 
they had 400,000 lifeboats they would not have saved the passengers, 
any more than under the seamen’s act. 

One thing you have harped on in connection with shipping on the 
Great Lakes. A ship tipped over on the locks at the river. It would 
not have made any difference what equipment they had on. 

Mr. Free. Do I understand you are opposing the lengthening of 
the season? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am opposing the lengthening of the season; yes, 
sir. I am opposing it on the ground that the weather conditions 
and other conditions are not such as have been described here. When 
I went into the weather condition in November it was immediately 
after I had stated that Congressmen Scott contemplated putting in 
an amendment to the present bill that would mean carrying on to 
the end of the season with the same lifeboat equipment as for the 
summer months. That is the reason I went into November. The rea¬ 
son that I said that was because of the fact, as I said when I was 
speaking of the loss of life on that night, that it was in and about 
Saginaw Bay. It was near the Point au Berques that the Price was 
turned over, and the air did not escape, so that she floated bottom up 
for days. The Point au Berques is one point as you come to Saginaw 
and Thunder Bay Island is the other. 

Mr. Scott. No ; you come up to the islands there. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am talking about the bay. Saginaw Bav is bounded 
at its extreme ends by Point au Berques and Thunder feay Island. 
That is, the bay. 

Mr. Scott. Of course, you are only 75, almost 80, miles off there; 
that is all. Thunder Bay Island, the south point, where you go into 
Saginaw Bay, is Point au Berques. But the north point that you go 
into Saginaw Bay is a small point—I do not recall the name—south 
of Tewes. 

Mr. O’Brien. South of Au Sable. 

Mr. Scott. And Thunder Bay Point is away up the lake. The 
Price that you spoke about sunk 11 miles off of Port Huron. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is where she sunk. The lake runs down and 
the current carries things along, and it is only 75 miles from Port 
Huron to Point aux Barques, and 60 miles to Harbor Beach or Sand 
Beach. 

Mr. Scott. Do you think it humanly possible—you have attempted 
to qualify as an expert operator—do you think it is humanly pos¬ 
sible— 


256 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien (interposing). I have qualified as an expert opera¬ 
tor? 

Mr. Scott. I imagine that you would be a pretty good seaman. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am. I am not egotistical in saying so. 

Mr. Scott. That is all right. A man without confidence in him¬ 
self can not expect others to have confidence in him. Do you think 
it is humanly possible to place on the statute books a law which will 
entirely prevent the loss of life on the? Great Lakes that will not 
entirely eliminate every ounce of navigation on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not believe that it would be possible to make 
any law that would eliminate. I am stating that, and you will note 
that whenever there is any doubt in my mind of anything I have to 
say I hesitate to express it. 

Mr. Scott. Let me call your attention to this fact: Do you also 
know that on the night which you mention that the Price went down 
that the City of Alpena , one of the ships that we are trying to get 
this legislation enacted for, to relieve the situation, the City of Alpena 
made the part at Port Huron coming down the Lakes on that iden¬ 
tical night? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is possible. 

Mr. Scott. It is not only possible; it is a fact. 

Mr. O’Brien. She may have made Port Huron, and may have 
been close to Port Huron before that storm started. I have sailed 
both places and I know the kind of weather. 

Mr. Scott. So do I. How long did you sail the Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have been on the Lakes about 15 years. 

Mr. Scott. Did you sail all the time ? 

Mr. O’Brien. With the exception of the time that I have been with 
the organization. 

Mr. Scott. You ought to have a fair knowledge of it, and as I 
have lived up there 43 years, all my life, on the Lakes, I ought to 
have a fair knowledge of it. 

Mr. O’Brien. Is it not a fact that there are men who have lived 
60 years in Alpena that do not know conditions on the Lakes ? 

Mr. Scott. I would not say that. I will almost take an affidavit 
that there are not 100 people in the city of Alpena who have not 
traveled up and down the Lakes, because for years, until 1885, it 
was the only means of getting out there; they did not have any 
railroads. 

Mr. Gahn. You testified this morning that the bulk of the passen¬ 
gers on the Great Lakes are carried from Decoration Day to Labor 
Day. 

Mr. O’Brien. I did, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. What percentage of passengers are carried between 
those times? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is the time that most of the boats are operated. 

Mr. Gahn. I understand that the present law gives that time be¬ 
tween May 15 and September 15. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. By making in the present law a limit from Decora¬ 
tion Day to Labor Day instead of 15 days before and after. 

Mr. O’Brien. That was the thing that puzzled me: Why they did 
not take advantage of that 30 days and running the ships in that 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 257 


time, and coming here and asking a further increase of time? Why 
do not the ships that are limiting themselves to running from Deco¬ 
ration Day to Labor Day take advantage of the law and run them 
from the 15th of May to the 15th of September? 

Mr. Scott. Do you want to know really on this record? The rea¬ 
son they do not take advantage of the 15 days in the summer and in 
the fall is this: That they have to equip their ships and have to make 
money while they run them, and the time they do run them is when 
the schools are out and traffic is congested going to the summer 
resorts. 

Mr. O’Brien. Then, it is not because of the restrictions of the sea¬ 
men’s bill ? 

Mr. Scott. It is because of the restrictions of the seamen’s bill, 
because if they could start on the 1st of April and haul a reasonable 
number of passengers in comparison with their actual hauling 
capacity, together with the freight they would get, they would do 
what they have done for 30 years before you fellows put this law on 
the books. 

Mr. O’Brien. Just let me answer. 

Mr. Scott. You can not answer it. 

Mr. Hardy. Let him try. 

Mr. Scott. I will be glad to have him try. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not suppose I will be able to answer you satis¬ 
factorily, but I will try to. The seamen, or, rather the vessel owner, 
has, according to the seamen’s act, the right to run his ship from 
the 15th day of May to the 15th day of September. The shipowners 
do not take advantage of that. They have all kinds of time to put 
their ships into a state whereby they could run them from the 1st of 
April to the 15th day of May. They do not take advantage of the 
opportunity to do that. Why, I do not know. Why do they not take 
advantage of that time given them by the seamen’s act, and take 
advantage of all of those passengers that have been described here, 
who could not get opportunity to get aboard of the ships instead of 
coming here and asking for a further increase in the time? I could 
understand their coming here if they had not been doing that—not 
running their ships from the 15th of May to the 15th of September— 
but seeing that they have acted voluntarily in cutting otf their runs 
a month themselves, I am at a loss to see whey they are coming here 
and asking for an extension of time. 

Mr. Gahn. That is only on large passenger boats. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir ; I am speaking of passenger boats used at 
Buffalo that run to Crystal Beach. I sailed a whole season on them. 
They started on the 30*th—Decoration Day—and wound up on Labor 
Day, immediately after Labor Day. That was one boat. The other 
boats might go out two or three days ahead of Decoration Day. 

Mr. Gahn. I do not know why the boats do not run. It seems to 
me the testimony has been to the effect that some of them desire to 
run. What is bothering me and, I think, the minds of most of the 
committee, is why is it more dangerous to operate a boat May 1 than 
May 15, and why is it more dangerous to operate October 15 than 
September 15 on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In operating ships with passengers, and you have 
50 per cent of appliances that will enable the passengers to go 
48420—21-17 


258 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

ashore and swim ashore; that is, from the 15th of May to the 15th 
of September. On the 1st of May the water is not as warm. I de¬ 
scribed why they did not run their ships on Lake Erie, where the 
water is much warmer than on Lake Huron. 

Mr. Gahn. I am talking about the danger. 

Mr. O’Brien. If the people have to jump into cold water they will 
die in the water, while in the summertime they might be able to live 
longer in the water, until some ship may come along and pick them 
up. 

Mr. Gahn. I live on Lake Erie. Tell me why it is warmer to jump 
into the water May 15 than May 1. 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, the sun has much greater oppor¬ 
tunity to shed its rays on the water for a longer period on May 15 
than on May 1, and, besides, the sun has been up North for 15 days 
longer. 

Mr. Gahn. We go by the health orders in Cleveland, and I am 
not sure of the exact date, but they do not open the bathing beaches 
until some time in July and will not allow anybody to bathe until 
July. 

Mr. O’Brien. There may be a reason for that. 

Mr. Gahn. It is coldness, I presume. It does not really get 
warmer until the month of July. 

Mr. O’Brien. In Lake Erie in the spring the water is cold up to 
the time of the extra men. 

Mr. Hardy. It is cold early in the spring and gets warm gradually. 

Mr. O’Brien. The lake gets froze over. 

Mr. Gahn. As I get you, the only reason there for safety is that 
if the boat does go down prior to September 15 the people will lose j 
their lives because of the chilliness of the water, and that alone ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is one reason. 

Mr. Gahn. What is another reason ? 

Mr. O’Brien. According to this bill, you are going to deprive the 
people from getting into the boats they have by putting on the Lakes 
unqualified men, unskilled men to put them into those boats. 

Mr. Hardy. I think I can shorten the investigation on that. The 
committee fixed those dates arbitrarily because they had to fix some 
dates. They believed that by the 15th of May the water was not so 
excessively cold as to make it almost death to get into it. They be¬ 
lieved also that September 15 was about the right time to stop, and 
they thought that by that time the weather conditions from storm 
and water conditions from cold necessitated some limitations. 

Mr. Gahn. An arbitrary date? 

Mr. Hardy. We could not fix anything but an arbitrary date. 

Mr. Gahn. So far as the stormy season on the Great Lakes is con¬ 
cerned, starting ahead two weeks and extending the time in the 
autumn has nothing to do with safety of passengers. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; I think that makes the thickness of the ice 
there. 

Mr. Gahn. I am talking about storms. 

Mr. O’Brien. Ice knocks holes in vessels, and boats may go down 
just as easily with a hole from ice as from a rock. The Eva Ward 
went down. I was on the old Arizona that left Buffalo on the 27th of 
April and went to Port Coburn with a hole in her boiler, steam escap- 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 259 

ing. M e had to fight our way through the ice at Buffalo to get out. 
.those are facts, actual conditions on the Lakes. The Eve T Vavd was 
going through. 

Mr. Scott. Were you on a wooden vessel ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes ; I was. 

Mr. Scott. Sure. 

Mr O’Brien. I will give you a steel vessel, the steamer Aurania, 
on which I was at that time in 1909, near Whitefish Point, where it 
was crushed by ice and sunk in the latter part of April or the 1st of 
May. 

Mr. Scott. In Lake Superior ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; and I am giving the ice conditions. The 
ice came along, and this was a steel ship, and crushed in the sides of 
the ship, and they had only time to crowed the boats and struggle across 
the ice with the boats to some other ships caught in the ice also. That 
was what saved them or they would have been drowned. 

Mr. Scott. Any lives lost ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; they were all seamen on there mostly. 

Mr. Scott. When was that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In 1909. 

Mr. Scott. Before you had any law at all ? 

Mr. O’Brien. We had all salt water men there and on salt water 
the fellows were from countries where there were requirements. 

Mr. Scott. No laws there? 

Mr. O’Brien. Laws in other countries. 

Mr. Scott. What kind of ship—Canadian ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. American ship. 

Mr. Scott. Under the United States flag? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; American citizen. 

Mr. Scott. In 1909 the La Follette Act was not passed? 

Mr. O’Brien. I know it was not. 

Mr. Davis. I understand he was replying to a question about 
weather conditions. 

Mr. Scott. You do not think that anyone is disputing the fact that 
in April it is colder in Lake Superior, 1,000 miles north of Buffalo, 
than in the middle of July? 

Mr. Davis. I would not think that it was disputed, but some ques¬ 
tions were asked the witness that indicated it was questioned. 

Mr. O’Brien. I gave an instance at Buffalo on the 27th of April. 
That was the time the ice was so dense the Arizona had to battle her 
way through on the 27th of April, 1910, on Lake Erie. 

Mr. Free. Is there much difference in the ice conditions on the 
Lakes farther' north than it is farther south during May ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There is some difference. I do not know whether it 
is true or not, but they do say that the ice sinks in Lake Superior. I 
do know that the water in Lake Superior in the middle of July is as 
cool as any ice water you can get out of any cooler. I have been over¬ 
board in Lake Superior and the shock was so violent that even inured 
as I was at that time to the weather conditions I could hardly speak 
for half an hour. 

Mr. Chindblom. At Marquette, Mich., the water was so cold in 
July and August that it was too cold for anyone to go in bathing. 

Mr. Scott. There is no passenger service on Lake Superior earlier 
than May ? 


260 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. No; there is not, but there is passenger service in 
July. The boats I was telling you about go through Lake Superior. 
They have to be taken in the spring when it comes to the question of 
taking off life-saving appliances, and they carry numerous passengers 
from Duluth. 

Mr. Scott. Do you think anybody could survive very long in water 
of Lake Superior even in midsummer ? 

Mr. O’Brien. A remarkable case happened. To show you how 
fair I am, I am going to tell you this case. Two years ago, the 
captain of the steamer Myron was coming in with his vessel and try¬ 
ing to make the Soo. The weather conditions were very bad, so he 
tried to get under Whitefiish Point in shelter, 40 miles from the 
Soo. He could not make it. The vessel started to go down from 
under him and did go down. He was inside of the pilot house; the 
whole deck, the pilot house, and he were taken completely off the 
ship. Everybody went except him. He lasted close to 24 hours. 
That is a most exceptional case of any that I have ever read in any 
kind of cold water. He must have been an exceptional man. 

Mr. Chindblom. What time of the year? 

Mr. O’Brien. The last of November. 

Mr. Scott. What year ? 

Mr. O’Brien. 1919. 

Mr. Chindblom. That was right under Grand Island; milder 
weather. 

Mr. O’Brien. Coming close to Whitefish Point. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is a little milder than the wide expanse of 
Lake Superior. 

The Chairman. We will meet to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. 

(Thereupon the committee adjourned to meet at 10 o’clock a. m., 
Thursday, May 5, 1921.) 


Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Thursday May 5 , 1921. 

The committee met at 10 o’clock a. m., Hon. William Greene (chair¬ 
man) presiding. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. O’Brien. 

STATEMENT OF MR. PATRICK O’BRIEN—Resumed. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would like to insert into the record this report on 
seamanship, skill, and efficiency adopted by the seaman’s convention 
for the purpose of trying to educate the membership of the organiza¬ 
tion and to bring about that efficiency necessary for competition with 
foreign vessel owners. 

Mr. Scott. How many pages is that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Only a couple of pages, that is all. 

Mr. Chindblom. What is the date of it? 

Mr. O’Brien. It was adopted in January, 1921. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that the report to which you referred yesterday? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. That the chairman said he had not received? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 261 


Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. No; that is not the report. This is in answer to a 
question as to what they had done toward educating the seamen. 
The report referred to yesterday was sent to all the old members of 
the committee, but not to the new members. 

The Chairman. There is no objection. 

(The report submitted by Mr. O’Brien is as follows:) 

Report of the Committee on Policies and Education, International Sea¬ 
men’s Union of America, on Seamanship, Skill, and Efficiency in the 

American Merchant Marine. 

[Adopted at the twenty-fourth annual convention, Philadelphia, Pa., Jan. 10-20, 1921.] 

To the officers and members of district unions, International Seamen's Union 

of America, greeting: 

All officers and members are urged to give their most earnest cooperation 
in the work of making effective the plans of the International Seamen’s Union 
of America to improve the standards of seamanship and skill in the American 
merchant marine, as provided for in the report of the committee on policies 
and education which was adopted by a unanimous vote at the Philadelphia 
convention as follows: 

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON POLICIES AND EDUCATION. 

The opening sections of the report of President Furuseth, which were re¬ 
ferred to your committee on policies and education, are a statement of the 
general purposes and aims of our international union, as understood and agreed 
to by the general membership from the very birth of our organization and 
expressed in the actions of many conventions, in the constitutions and organiza¬ 
tion laws under which the district unions operate, and in the records of the 
meetings where the members voice their opinions and cast their votes. 

The desire for freedom and—freedom having been attained—the purpose to 
make the highest and best use of our liberties is the keynote. 

The seaman’s calling is an honorable one and is entitled to be again recog¬ 
nized as one of the world’s most honored of professions. It calls for unfalter¬ 
ing courage and virile manhood. It is no place for cowards and shirkers. For a 
time it suffered degradation and even shame, and press, pulpit, and author 
seemed to join in a combined sneer at the men who carry the world’s com¬ 
merce over the waters of the deep, but the real spirit of seamanship, with its 
stern' code that demands willing sacrifice, undaunted courage, ready initiative, 
and a high order of intelligence, has survived all attacks and through our 
international union is now finding a new and revived expression of itself. The 
goal of freedom has been attained. The degradation of bondage has been 
wiped out. The law has performed its function, except in so far as it has not 
yet been properly enforced by the Government. 

It now becomes our duty to make the fullest use of the opportunities created 
by the restoration of our rights as citizens in such manner as may be best 
calculated to make good the promise we made to ourselves, as stated by Presi¬ 
dent Furuseth, that our calling shall again take its proper place as one of the 
most honored professions among men, and that men shall so recognize it. 

Your committee is in full accord with the report of President Furuseth on 
this subject and herewith presents for the consideration of the convention the 
following recommendations for specific action in relation thereto: 

SEAMANSHIP AND SKILL. 

It may be well at the outset for the delegates to recall the manner in which 
the committee on policies and education was brought into existence at this 
convention. The decision to appoint such a committee was reached after very 
considerable discussion in the committee of the whole, during which the general 
subject of seamanship and skill was given much attention. The resolution 
proposing the appointment of a committee was adopted by the committee of 
the whole, reported to the convention, and there approved. 


262 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Your attention is respectfully called to the following section of President 
Furuseth’s report: 

“ We promised ourselves that we would work for the maintenance and de¬ 
velopment of skill in seamanship, and we should, on shore as well as on board 
vessels, do our best in developing such a standard of skill that the vessels 
need not go to the repair shops except for general overhauling or to repair 
damages arising from accidents.” 

Your committee is of the opinion that the time has now arrived when we can 
and must make good the promise that skilled seamanship, especially among the 
members of our international union, shall be developed to the fullest possible 
extent. The recent development of the American merchant marine, the tre¬ 
mendous increase in the number of its ships, and the quick growth of its per¬ 
sonnel has created a condition which renders immediate action essential. The 
life of any industry depends upon its power to meet competition. 

The passage of the seamen’s act established the means through which the 
cost of operation, as between American and foreign vessels, has been equalized 
in that, with the proper enforcement of that law, the cost of operation of 
foreign vessels automatically rises to the American level. It was not until our 
international union had itself worked out the solution of the operating cost 
problem and had carried on a vigorous campaign for the enactment of the laws 
necessary to solve the problem that a national understanding of the subject was 
aroused. The cost of operation having been equalized, or where the equalization 
has not already taken place, made easily possible if the law be enforced, a 
decided advantage can be given to the American merchant marine and to 
American seamen through the quick development of a high order of skilled 
seamanship and efficiency. The sudden increase in the number of ships and 
the number of seamen resulting from the war has intensified the need for 
some systematic method by which skill and efficiency of American sea labor 
can be quickly and effectively improved." 

It is not likely that any agency other than the International Seamen’s Union 
of America will offer any pract'cal means whereby th's can be done. We 
ourselves must formulate the plans and put them into operation, or, failing 
to do so, it is we who must suffer the consequences. The best that can be 
hoped for from others is that, after we have undertaken the task and proven 
our ability to cope with it, they may be persuaded to cooperate with us. We be¬ 
lieve that prompt act'on is as necessary in the interests of the members of 
the organization as it is for the industry. We therefore present for the con¬ 
sideration and action of the convention the following recommendations on this 
subject: 

RECOMMENDATIONS. 

1. That the executive board be authorized and instructed to secure the 
services of a vocational export or experts who shall, under the direction of 
the board, make a survey of the entire craft to ascertain its needs in respect 
to seamanship, general trade skill and efficiency, and to work out plans 
whereby the knowledge of seamanship in all degrees of sk'll necessary to the 
fullest development of all divisions of the craft may be transmitted to the 
members of all affiliated organ'zations. 

2. The plan must include arrangements whereby the members of the union 
shall be given opportunities to improve the'r skill and efficiency in general 
rigging and repair work on board ship, in all departments. 

3. The plan should include lectures on the development and purposes of the 
craft and its practices, to be accompanied by illustrations in the form of 
stereopticon views, maps, and, where necessary and possible, moving pictures 
in such manner as to be interesting as well as instructive. 

4. Lectures and d'scussions should include information on the question of 
discipline on board ship, its theory and practice, needs and purposes. 

5. Arrangements should be made for the compilation and circulation of 
printed matter, through which such information of seamanship, sk'll, and 
efficiency as may be presented in printed form, can be made accessible to the 
membership. It should be borne in mind that considerable work is involved 
in the compilation of this kind of information, which, to be of any real value, 
must be illustrated by drawings, maps, and pictures. 

6. Technical information on stra'ns, leverages, weights, etc., involved in the 
use of ships’ gear and equipment, should be transmitted to the membership. 

7. It should be thoroughly understood that the initial work of this plan 
should have for its purpose the improvement of seamanship, skill, and effi- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMENACT. 263 


c'ency of the. members of the union who have had some substantial service on 
board ship, and who have attained the positions of able seamen, firemen and 
oilers, cooks, etc., with a view of later so developing 1 the system as to fit the 
needs of the beginners in the calling. The development in this respect will 
undoubtedly be very rapid once the plan is in operation. 

8. In order that the executive board may be enabled to put into effect this 
plan, the affil'ated unions shall immediately be called upon to furnish the sum 
of $15,000, each district union to pay into such fund an amount proportionate 
to its treasury. The money thus contr.buted shall be placed in an account 
separate from the general fund of the international union and shall be used 
exclusively for the 1 purpose of carrying out the plans herein outlined. 

9. The executive board shall have authority to call upon the district unions 
for such additional contributions to the fund from time to time as may, in the 
judgment of the board, be necessary. 

Comm ttee on policies and education: Victor A. Olander, chairman, Sailors’ 
Union of the Great Lakes; Oscar Carlson, Marine Firemen, Oilers, and Water 
Tenders’ Union of the Atlantic and Gulf; Percy J. Pryor, Eastern and Gulf 
Sailors’ Association; H. P. Griffin, Marine Cooks and Stewards’ Union of the 
Atlantic; Thomas Conway, Mar ne Firemen, OPers, and Water Tenders’ Un'on 
of the Great Lakes; Patrick O’Brien, Sailors’ Union of the Great Lakes; P. B. 
Gill, Sailors’ Union of the Pacific; Ed. Rosenberg, Sailors’ Union of the Pacific; 
W. H. Brown, Fishermen’s Union of the Atlantic; G. H. Brown, Eastern and 
Gulf Sailors’ Association. 

Fraternally submitted. 

Andrew Furuseth, 

President International Seamen's Union of America. 

Attest: 

T. A. Hanson, 

Secretary-Treasurer International Seamen's Union of America. 

Mr. Briggs. I would like to ask the witness a few questions this 
morning. Had you finished, Mr. O’Brien? 

Mr. O’Brien. With this exception: I want to correct a slight error 
in dates that I made yesterday, owing to the fact the questions were 
coming so rapidly. I said 1910 instead of 1911 in reference to the’ 
year I was on board the Arizona. It was in April in 1911, instead 
of 1910. I wish to make that correction. It does not affect the ice 
conditions at all, because it is the same month. 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. And in regard to the question on the boundaries of 
Saginaw Bay, according to this chart - 

Mr. Chindblom. What do you mean by this chart? 

Mr. O’Brien. The chart that has been submitted. 

Mr. Ciitndblom. What is it ? Put it in the record. 

Mr. O’Brien. It is the general chart of the northwestern lakes. 

Mr. Chindblom. Issued by the War Department? 

Mr. O’Brien. I presume so. The point I want to make is this, 
that most of the evidence submitted here, or the testimony submitted, 
has been to get boat service to Alpena. Now. Alpena is across here, 
right on the east shore of Thunder Bay, on a line almost due north of 
Pointe aux Barques. That means that the points determining Sagi¬ 
naw Bay are practically from the Pointe aux Barques to Thunder 
Bay Island. 

Mr. Scott. Now, you do not mean that. You and I are not going 
to quarrel about that; but you know that Thunder Bay Island is 
fully 75 or 80 miles north of Pointe Aux Barques, and the waters 
out of Saginaw Bay do not hit within 50 miles of it. Just south of 
Pointe Aux Barques are Charity Islands, which are right in the 
north entrance to Saginaw Bay. Now, they break all the seas that 



264 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

come down through there from the north. The only sea you ge> is 
really a northeaster that sweeps into Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. O'Brien. Don’t you get the southeaster, too ? 

Mr. Scott. In Saginaw Bay? 

Mr. O’Brien. If you come up here, then you run almost direct 
north | indicating]. 

Mr. Chindblom. Now, when you say “come up here” and “this 
point here,” that does not get into the record. 

Mr. O’Brien. I mean South Point. If you run across from Pointe 
Aux Barques to Pointe Aux Sable, then you have a run directly 
north and you run a lee shore, and if anything happens to your 
vessel you are in more danger than if you are out here [indicating]. 

Mr. Scott. There is only one wind when they come up Lake 
Huron—that is, on the passenger ships—that is even discommoding 
or concerting or dangerous, according to its proportion and inten¬ 
sity, and that wind is a northeast wind. With a west wind, a south¬ 
east wind, a southwest wind, or a northwest wind you are protected 
by the lee of the land; you are in the lee of the land all the while. 
The boats follow the east coast and cut right across from this point 
to this point [indicating]. 

Mr. Briggs. To what are you referring; to Pointe Aux Barques 
and Charity Islands? 

Mr. Scott. From Pointe Aux Barques to Pointe Aux Sable, which 
is about 28 miles, I should imagine. And then you are in the lee of 
the land all the way up. You do not leave the lee of the land at any 
point all the way up; you are never more than 10 miles from shore? 

Mr. Cullen. Are you sailing to leeward all the time? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. I will admit, and I will state it is perfectly true, 
that when you come south to Alpena you are in the lee of the land 
with a westerly and northwesterly or southwesterly or southerly 
wind; but when you are coming with a northerly wind, with a north¬ 
east wind or when the wind is an east-northeast wind or an east 
wind or an east-southwest wind you are bearing the whole brunt of 
that wind on that shore and would be likely to be driven ashore if 
you could not land if anything should happen and the vessel was 
near the beach. A captain is very glad if there is sufficient water 
between him and the shore, because then he is at the mercy of the 
elements and liable to be driven ashore. 

Mr. Cullen. He wants to be in deep water, of course? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; he wants to be. in deep w T ater. And the 
regular course of the vessel running across from Pointe Aux Barques 
to Alpena is not across the bay and then up along the land, because 
that means more fuel; it means a longer distance. You cut across 
right straight into Alpena. Now, in a northeastern wind you have 
the whole sweep of the widest part of Lake Huron right on you. 
Lake Huron at this particular point is wider than any lake of the 
chain of lakes, with the exception of Lake Superior. I stated yes¬ 
terday that that was known as the graveyard of the Lakes, that par¬ 
ticular point right there. 

Mr. Scott. Saginaw Bay? 

Mr. O’Brien Yes, sir; Saginaw Bay. It is known as Saginaw 
Bay all the way across there. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13,, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 265 

Mr. Scott. And you stated tlie only accident that has happened 
there for a great many years. It used to be when the old sailing ves¬ 
sels were on, a very bad place. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. But in recent years, since we have gotten modern 
navigation, has it been in reality a graveyard? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; but around Saginaw Bay, in 1913, some of the 
finest steel vessels on the chain of lakes were lost. 

Mr. Scott. My dear fellow, you are absolutely wrong about that, 
and I think if you will examine the record you will find there was 
not a vessel sunk or a vessel foundered within 60 miles of Saginaw 
Bay. And in that particular instance, as a matter of fairness, it 
ought to appear on the record, in view of the fact the witnesss has 
spent so much time on it; it was in November, just at the opening 
of the deer season. IIow I happen to know, I was deer hunting, 
and we got some information about it. We had something that had 
never occurred before in the history of the Great Lakes. Whether 
it was a typhoon or whether it was a cyclone, that sometimes come 
down there, or what it was, nobody knows. But 20 vessels, within a 
radius of 3 or 4 miles of St. Clair River, just south of Port Huron, 
south of Lexington, got into this typhoon. But that is outside of 
Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. O’Brien. Is it not a fact that on that night there were 22 
vessels lost and there were 250 lives lost? 

Mr. Scott. I do not remember the exact number; you may be 
right about that. 

Mr. Briggs. What is your recollection of how many vessels were 
lost? 

Mr. O’Brien. There were about 22 vessels and 250 lives lost that 
night. Now, in 1909, on Lake Erie^—these typhoons occur pretty 
often on the Lakes—— 

Mr. Scott. All of these vessels that were lost on this particular 
occasion in 1913 were freight vessels, were they not? There was 
not a single passenger vessel in the bunch ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There were no passenger vessels, with the possible 
exception you stated. 

Mr. Scott. Now, in view of the fact that these occurrences are not 
unusual on the Lakes, typhoons similar to that of November 9, 
1913 —that was the date this thing occurred; it was in November, 

1913_in view of the fact you have just said that these occurrences 

are not unusual on the Great Lakes, I want you to tell this committee 
any other occasion of the same kind in the history of the Great Lakes. 
Name one. 

Mr. O’Brien. I was going to do that. 

Mr. Scott. I will be glad to hear it. 

Mr. O’Brien. In 1909 there were over 150 lives lost in one night 
on Lake Erie. 

Mr. Briggs. Instead of stating how many lives were lost, I wish 
you would state, for the benefit of the committee, how many boats 
were lost and give the names, if you can. 

Mr. O’Brien. There were three boats lost that night on Lake 
Erie—three steel ships. 

Mr. Scott. What were they ? 


266 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. One was a car ferry, one of the finest classes they 
have. 

Mr. Cullen. Of what length? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not exactly tell you. 

Mr. Cullen. One thousand, 1,500, 2,000, 2,500 tons, or what? 

Mr. O’Brien. More than that. I was on one of those ships the year 
before, the Richardson. She went out of Buffalo—— 

Mr. Briggs, Now, just one minute. We are dealing now with the 
weather, the loss of boats, and storms. Let us get that without any 
deviation and give us the names of the vessels. 

Mr. O’Brien. The Richardson was running down, trying to get 
into Buffalo. This was a southwester. She was a steel ship and 
carried about 5,500 tons. She tried to turn around, because they 
could not make Buffalo, because of the land I was telling you 
about- 

Mr. Briggs. You described that in your testimony yesterday, did 
you not? Was that the one towing a barge? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; that was the Rappahannock. This Rich¬ 
ardson was a modern steel ship. 

Mr. Briggs. I am not much interested in all the details of the 
storm, but just the fact there was one. 

Mr. O’Brien. The Richardson , this car ferry, went down that 
night with a loss of 50 lives or a little more. I am not exactly cer¬ 
tain about that. 

Mr. Chindblom. At what time of the year ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That was on the 8th of December, 1909. 

Mr. Scott. They were all freight boats, were they not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jefferis. Did these boats go down simply because of the 
storm and condition of the boats, or was there a lack of men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. It was a result of the weather, and I am trying to 
prove the lake conditions. 

Mr. Jefferis. Was there any lack of seamen on board? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. 

Mr. Chindblom. What you want to show is that there was a storm 
on Lake Erie in December, 1909 ? 

Mr. O’Brien. What I want to-show, sir, is that the conditions in 
1918, in November—that the same weather conditions have been there 
for years and that ships have gone down, and not on one occasion 
only. That was the question Congressman Scott asked me. In 
1905, on Lake Superior, particularly, and through the Lakes, we had 
another tremendous storm with great loss of life. I forget how 
many lives were lost then, but the men were frozen in the ventilators, 
where they took shelter; they were frozen to death. 

Mr. Chindblom. At what time of year did that occur ? 

Mr. O’Bbien. I could not exactly tell you. 

Mr. Chindblom. Was it in the spring, summer, fall, or winter? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you; I do not know. 

Mr. Edmonds. There is not any intention in this bill to regulate 
the weather? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. I do not see what interest it is whether there are 
storms up there. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 267 

Mr. Briggs. There was testimony here that there were no storms 
on the Lakes; no violent conditions up there; no necessity for extra 
lifeboats or anything of that character. 

Mr. Edmonds. We all know they have storms on the Lakes. I 
have been in one of those storms up there myself. 

Mr. Briggs. And I was interested in learning, and so was Con¬ 
gressman Scott, whether there were any such things as that. 

Mr. Edmonds. I do not think any man denies there are storms on 
the Lakes, and just as bad as on the ocean. 

Mr. Scott. They have periodic storms there; we have thunder¬ 
storms. 

Mr. Briggs. Are these the only experiences you know of now, Mr. 
O’Brien? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is all. 

Mr. Briggs. In those various years? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you had any other years when you had bad 
weather on the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; we have very bad weather. I have come 
through the Straits of Mackinaw with the thermometer down to 
8 below zero. 

Mr. Scott. At what time of the year? 

Mr. O’Brien. In December. 

Mr. Scott. How late in December? 

Mr. O’Brien. About the 4th of December. 

Mr. Scott Of course, my bill is not attempting to extend the 
season into December 

Mr. O’Brien. The reason I brought this thing up is because you 
told me you intended to extend it to the whole season. 

Mr. Scott. No; I intend to ask the committee to extend it to some 
time in December, but that only applies to the passenger trade, and 
I am not attempting to touch on the freight business. Your testimony 
has been directed entirely to the freight transportation, except the 
comments you have made based on your one summer’s experience on 
the Tionesta. The Tionesta is a long-haul ship. She is now the only 
ship of its character making the long haul from Buffalo to Duluth. 

Mr. O’Brien. There are three ships. 

Mr. Scott. I mean that fleet. 

Mr. O’Brien. There are the Tionesta , the Octarara , and the 
J uanita. 

Mr. Scott. Those three belong to the same company, and they are 
the only ships which make what we know as the long haul, which is 
comparable to an ocean voyage—that is, it takes four and a half days 
to make it. That is the longest trip on the Great Lakes; and the 
shortest trip on the ocean is six days, from New York to Brest. 

Mr. O’Brien. I also spoke of the Crystal Beach boats. I was on 
the Crystal Beach boats also for one season. . . 

Mr. Briggs. What boats are those ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Those are passenger boats that carry as many as 
3,500 passengers. 

Mr. Scott. They do not carry any freight at all; they are pas¬ 
senger boats you are talking about ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am. You weer objecting to my talking about 
freight boats. 


268 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. On what boat did you sail? 

Mr. O’Brien. I sailed on the Americana. 

Mr. Scott. My bill does not affect the Crystal Beach boats, run¬ 
ning from Buffalo to Crystal Beach. They are excursion boats, and 
only run in the summer time. 

Mr. O’Brien. Isn’t the objection to Buffalo because they could 
not run the boats? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; but the excursion boats that run in the summer 
are not interested in my bill, only as far as extending the season. It 
is only where they have a run of less than 16 hours that they are 
affected by this bill, with reference to the crew they shall carry. Out¬ 
side of that they are not interested at all in my amendment. 

Mr. O’Brien. The three passenger boats that run to Duluth, are 
they not going to be affected by your bill ? 

Mr. Scott. Only in so far as they are allowed to use certificated 
lifeboat men. 

Mr. O’Brien. Is not that something? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; I will admit it is something, but it is not vital 
at all. 

Mr. O’Brien. It isn’t—to take away the skilled men and to take, 
instead, unskilled men. 

Mr. Scott. That is farthest from my purpose. And I want to 
s&y to you that we had skilled men and we had better men before the 
law went into effect than we have had since, and we certainly had 
more service than we have had since. That is really my purpose. 

Mr. Briggs. You have stated all you wanted to about the weather 
conditions ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And I think Congressman Edmonds says everybody 
knows we have storms on the Great Lakes like everywhere else. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you if you have read the proposed 
measure of Congressman Scott? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you read it carefully? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Brtggs. I wish you would state to the committee what you 
understand that bill will do with reference to the changes it will 
effect 

Mr. O’Brien. It will affect- 

Mr. Briggs. Just take the different sections and show what, changes 
it will make in the existing conditions. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not going to take up section 2 for this reason: 
I am a sailor and am not as familiar with the engineering room de¬ 
partment—and that is the part that will affect—as Mr. Conway, and 
he will take that up. 

Mr. Briggs. All right. Pass on to the next change. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am deeply interested in the proviso on page 4, 
to section 13— 

Provided, That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters certificated 
lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen. 

That is the part that I am very deeply interested in and wish em¬ 
phatically to protest against the passage of. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 269 


Mr. Briggs. I understand that you make a protest against it; 
what I am talking about is the changes this bill effects. 

Mr. O’Brien. That bill will mean, instead of having able seamen 
on the ships, who will have to serve and have served a certain 
time, three years on the ocean and but 18 months sailing on the 
Lakes, that that requirement will not be there and that men without 
any service at all will be hired to do the work of the skilled men in 
that respect. 

Mr. Briggs. You covered that situation pretty well yesterday in 
your testimony? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. ' 

Mr. Bbiggs. What I want to ask you is, does this proviso apply 
alike to freight boats and passenger steamers—steamers carrying 
package freight and steamers carrying passengers? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It applies to all? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. There is no distinction? 

Mr. O’Brien. No distinction. 

Mr. Briggs. Is it limited to Lake Michigan at all ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It applies to all the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. It applies to all the Lakes. 

Mr. Briggs. Is it limited to any season? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Does it apply on the ocean or just on the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. That proviso is for the Lakes alone. 

Mr. Briggs. All right; pass on to your next proposition. 

Mr. O’Brien. This will be taken up by others. 

Mr. Briggs. That part you are particularly interested in is the 
substitution of certificated lifeboat men for the able seamen? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. That is the chief provision? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; and the extension of time. 

Mr. Briggs. Now, you have testified a great deal about the condi¬ 
tions that obtain on the Lakes, and I want to know if you feel that 
you are able to give this committee any information concerning 
whether the operation of the seamen’s law is responsible for the 
condition to which reference has been made here by the various 
witnesses who have already testified and whose testimony you have 
heard? You have heard, for instance, from as many of the witnesses 
as the committee has, that many of these boat lines have had to give 
up operation by reason of the requirements of the seamen’s act, 
particularly with reference to the requirement that additional mem¬ 
bers of the crew should be carried for whom there is absolutely no 
need on these vessels, and that it just makes an added expense which 
prevents the boat from continuing in service and giving to the 
public the service which otherwise might be furnished. I do not 
know that they said they otherwise would furnish it, but at least it 
is claimed here it is a contributing factor or consequence. I wish 
• you would give your idea about what is the cause for that, whether 
it is affected by the seamen’s act or whether it is not, or what causes 
are responsible. 


270 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. O’Brien. I do not believe the seamen’s act has in any way 
affected the running of the ships in the manner described in the tes¬ 


timony. 

Mr. Briggs. What is your idea about it ? 


I am asking you for your 


Mr. O’Brien. The seamen’s act has only insisted upon men being 
upon the ships with a certain amount of skill; that is, a certain 
amount of service. 

Mr. Briggs. Without too much argument about it, are you ac¬ 
quainted with the conditions with reference to the package-freight 
steamers or the ones carrying combination package freight and pas¬ 
sengers, and particularly on the short runs ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That will be handled by Mr. Conway, on the short 
runs, because it affects specifically the firemen’s department. 

Mr. Briggs. You are not able to speak about that? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. On the long run, you have heard testimony here—you 
remember the witness who testified here, perhaps it was Mr. Newman, 
and stated they carried on their steamers at least 21 men when that 
just made 9 extra men? 

Mr. Hardy. I think he said it was nine extra men in his entire 


fleet of four boats. 

Mr. Briggs. And that it made considerable difference in the ex¬ 
pense account. I think he handed the figures in. And he said he 
could not use those men for anything else than as able seamen. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. I wish you would discuss a situation of that kind, 
where there are able seamen on board the ships who do nothing but 
just stand ready to launch the lifeboats and just act as watchmen— 
whether they have other duties or not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know of any ships where men are on that 
they are not employed continuously in their watch on deck. For in¬ 
stance, when it came to a question last year—we asked for a 56-hour 
week from the vessel owners and they stated- 

Mr. Briggs. Now, Mr. O’Brien- 

Mr. O’Brien. I am going to show when the question came up they 
stated to us that the amount of men they had was not sufficient to give 
a 56-hour week, when with all of the statements they have made here, 
with regard to the surplus of men, they could very easily have given 
us a 56-hour week. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Briggs’s question is directed particularly to what 
they do. Everybody admits they are on watch, but on watch and 
doing nothing. They might just as well be asleep as on watch. 

Mr. Briggs. What I am interested in is the effect of the act. I am 
not talking about any arrangements between the ship operators and 
the organization. That matter has been injected a great deal into all 
the testimony. I appreciate that, but what I am interested in is how 
this act is operating and whether it is operating to the detriment of 
the operation of ships on the Great Lakes, so as to exclude the opera¬ 
tion of ships on the Great Lakes, and whether this bill is a proper 
one and will accomplish that. 

Mr. O’Brien. I will read from the testimony given to the sub¬ 
committee last year, and, I think, made by Mr. Thorp to me on that 
question. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 271 

Mr. Free. I have been trying to get this same thing Mr. Briggs is 
asking you and you have evaded it each time. What I want and what 
I think Mr. Briggs wants is this: Take these boats that have a six or 
seven hour run and suppose you had two watches, would that work 
an undue hardship on the men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That presupposes- 

Mr. Free. Now, answer the question directly. 

Mr. O’Brien. I can not say yes or not on that question for this 
reason, for I must explain ships are not run like railroad trains. 
Your men must work on the ship when in port, and no matter if the 
run confined itself to 55 minutes, our work, at intervals, when in 
port must go on. 

Mr. Free. Just right on that point: For instance, there is some 
testimony here that oilers, or whatever it is, when they are actually 
in port, they do not do anything on the boat. Is that a fact—that 
they don’t handle freight or do anything else? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not conversant with that particular department 
on the ship. Mr. Conway will answer that question. He is a prac¬ 
tical man and he understands that work; I do not understand that 
work. 

Mr. Free. You do not know whether there are on board these 
boats that take that short run men, w T hile in port, who have nothing 
to do and the companies have to pay them for that time ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have never heard of it, sir, until I heard the 
owners saying those things. 

Mr. Briggs. Now, let us get back to these nine men. I do not care 
anything about the arrangement between the organization and the 
operators. I am talking about the law. As I understand, the law 
requires them to carry these extra men, and the testimony of Mr. 
Newman or somebody was that these men did not do anything except 
to draw their salaries and be up there to lower the lifeboats and do 
things attendant on that sore of service. 

Mr. O’Brien. In case of accident. 

Mr. Briggs. As I understand him, Capt. Simpson stated he did 
make some arrangement to in some way make use of his men, and he 
had no complaint to make about that; but the other witness made 
quite a point about it and showed quite a loss in the records of his 
operating expenses. 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Newman uses practically all passenger ships and 
package freight. Now, on passenger ships the ships must be kept 
clean; they carry quite a number of passengers- 

Mr. Briggs. I understand that. What I am talking about is this: 
First, is it true? Just answer that, and then you can make the ex¬ 
planation. Is it true these nine men carried on there can not be put 
to any other service on the ship except to launch the lifeboats, or 
something of that character? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is not true, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. All right; tell us what they are used for and what they 
can be used for. 

Mr. O’Brien. They are used in the places formerly occupied by 
the deck hands. 

Mr. Briggs. What do you mean by that—to scrub the ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. These ordinary seamen—your scrub seamen—clean 
the paints, clean the ship, splice ropes- 


272 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. They can be called on for that purpose ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; and they do that work. 

Mr. Briggs. And your organization allows them to do that work? 

Mr. O’Brien. Our organization insists on that work. 

Mr. Briggs. They have just to stand around idle on this ship and 
smoke and wait for a storm to happen to launch lifeboats; is that it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; that is not it. The men on the ships have to 
work. 

Mr. Briggs. How do you imagine Mr. Newman had this expe¬ 
rience ? You heard his testimony ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I heard his testimony, and probably Mr. Newman 
imagines we ought to go back to the conditions prior to the seaman’s 
act and have cheaper men there instead of able seamen. 

Mr. Bland. Why can not less expensive men do that work ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Because they have not the skill. The reason the 
seaman’s act was passed was because of the fact the men on board of 
the ships at that time were insufficient to handle the lifeboats and to 
save life at sea, and they were put on there for doing that work. But 
they displaced other men when they were put on there, and if Mr. 
Newman has been doing anything outside of that, then he has been 
doing himself an injury. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, your contention is that Mr. Newman 
is entitled to use those men for other service on his ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. If he wants to ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And if he has not been getting that service out of the 
men it is some fault of the operating department of his ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. For instance, there are able seamen as 
pursers on board of the Crystal Beach boats who fill in on the boat 
question as able seamen and do the work of purser. Then there are 
patrolmen who go around and see that order is kept amongst these 
passengers. They are able seamen. They used to be able seamen 
before. These men are all placed in capacities or positions formerly 
held by people who knew nothing about boats at all. 

Mr. Briggs. Now, have you operated on any of the passenger ships 
other than the one you spoke about? Did you ever work on Mr. 
Newman’s boats, for instance? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. On the vessels you have worked on, were they pas¬ 
senger ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have worked on passenger ships. 

Mr. Briggs. On any ships similar to these Mr. Newman operates ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; I did not work on those. 

Mr. Briggs. I did not say you worked on those, but on any ships 
similar to those? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Briggs. The ships you worked on were mostly freight? 

Mr. O’Brien. Mostly freight. 

Mr. Briggs. And what was this Americana; she was a passenger 
ship? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Engaged in what kind of business? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 273 

Mr. O’Brien. Running from Buffalo to Crystal Beach—excur¬ 
sions. 

Mr. Briggs. How large a boat is that? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Newman’s boats and the large boats like those 
referred to by Capt. Simpson; they are really liners ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Liners? 

Mr. Briggs. I mean by that that they run on schedule between 
certain ports? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. I am using possibly the sea term rather than the one 
used on the Lakes. Prior to the operation of the seaman’s act you 
stated you had served on the Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And you have served on the Lakes since the operation 
of the seaman’s act ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. What have you observed with reference to the em¬ 
ployees on the ships there, whether there were any emploi^ees on 
ships there since the operation of the seaman’s act who did not 
have something to do on the vessels on which you served, and 
whether the boats seemed to be inadequately manned, or were before 
the passage of the seaman’s act ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Before the passage of the seaman’s act we had 
men, who were not conversant at all with the vessels, in the deck 
department as ordinary seamen. Deck hands they were called. 
Some of those men were used in the fire holds as well. The vast 
majority of them—there were, of course, some who would try to 
acquire skill, but the vast majority of them simply went along and 
made a trip and got off the ship again because of the conditions 
that prevailed on the ships. Now, since the passage of the seaman’s 
act, and the 65 per cent of the deck crew being able seamen, you have 
mingled in with those ordinary seamen a certain percentage of the 
able seamen who are working with those men continuously. And 
because of the elimination of the work in the firehold and on deck 
and the long hours these men that are on deck now remain longer 
and a larger number of them qualify as able seamen. 

Mr. Briggs. In this connection, for the benefit of members of the 
committee who are not mariners, I wish you would tell us just what 
you mean by watches and just how they are divided up in the service 
on the ship. 

Mr. O’Brien. W atches are divided on the Lakes six hours on and 
six off. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean by “ off ” that they are resting or doing 
anything they please at that time? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; that is, in the time off they get their meals 
and they sleep, and read if they have any time. 

Mr. Briggs. That accounts for 12 hours during the day. What 
becomes of the other 12 hours ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The other 12 hours they work. They are at the 
wheel- 

Mr. Briggs. You mean they work eight hours? 

48420—21-18 


274 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. They work 12 hours a clay. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean, divided into two watches; that they work 
12 hours a day and divide it into two 6-hour periods? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And rest for six hours? 

Mr. O’Brien. And rest for six hours. 

Mr. Scott. That is, with two crews? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is, with two crews; that is, the able seamen. 
The able seamen and the ordinary seamen, according to the present 
law, work watch and watch; that is, 6 hours on and 6 off. Say you go 
on watch at 6 in the morning; you work until 12, come off at 12, and 
rest until 6; and go on at 6 in the evening and work until 12 mid¬ 
night. That is two watches—12 hours. 

Mr. Briggs. What system is employed under the present act on 
those large vessels—the freighters? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is the system the act calls for. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the system before the passage of the act? 

Mr. O’Brien. The system before the passage of the act was six on 
and six off, but it was not compulsory. You could be worked off 
watch; you could be called out coming into port; despite the fact 
you had just turned in after doing your six hours’ watch, you could 
be called out immediately and be compelled to work another six hours 
and then go on in your regular turn for another six hours. 

Mr. Briggs. And this act broke the watches and so gave this rest 
period in there in this special way to which you refer ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. I think my testimony on the Rappahan¬ 
nock shows that, where I had to stay on practically from 12 o’clock 
midnight until 6 o’clock in the morning after—24 hours. 

Mr. Briggs. That was before the passage of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. The passage of the seamen’s act eliminated 
that. 

Mr. Scott. How many times did you ever do that in your expe¬ 
rience? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you. I did 37 hours at one time 
at sea. 

Mr. Scott. I want to know how many times you did that? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did 37 hours at sea on another occasion. 

Mr. Edmonds. That was during a storm, though. 

Mr. O’Brien. No; not during a storm I did 37 hours, and during 
a storm I did 30 hours. And going into port, it was a regular 
occurrence with the lumber boats to dock—you could dock at 6 in the 
morning. You had been on watch from 12 o’clock that night, and 
you would dock at 6 in the morning, and in spite of that fact, gentle¬ 
men, we had to load lumber on the Lakes. When we were loading 
we he^ed to load the lumber in the lumber trade, and we did the 
same amount of work and received the same amount of pay while 
doing that work. We would go on watch at 6 o’clock at night and 
work until 12 o’clock midnight, and then you had to stand watch on 
deck from 7 o’clock that day until 6 in the evening shoving lumber. 
And then when all of the lumber was on board of the vessel at one 
end that you could get on you shifted the boat to another part, and 
then a couple of hours elapsed before you got any watch or any time 
off. Those things were common prior to the passage of the seaman’s 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 275 

act on the Lakes. It was in consequence of those conditions that the 
seaman s act was passed and the insistence on the two-watch system 
was made. J 

Mr. Scott. Now, Mr O’Brien, you have testified particularly as 
*P anner in which Mr. Newman manages his boats. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Scxot. Oh, you gave positive testimony as to what his men 
did. Did you ever work on any of his boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I did not, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Therefore you do not know, of your own knowledge, 
at what Mr. Newman employs his men on board of these ships, or 
whether he has work for all of them or only part of them? 

Mr. O’Brien. Why, I used to come in contact with all the men on 
the Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. I say of your own knowledge you do not know whether 
Mr. Newman has employment for all of the men on board of his 
ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. If you mean by that whether I was on board to see 
the men doing that work, I was not. 

Mr. Scott. Then, when he says to this committee, after some 
35 years operating ships prior to the passage of the La Follette sea¬ 
man’s act that after the passage of the act he was compelled to carry 
nine more men than he had work for them to perform you think that 
that statement is grossly incorrect? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think that that is exactly correct; no, sir; 
I do not. 

Mr. Scott. Then you think Mr. Newman is not familiar with the 
character of the work his men do on his ships? 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Newman does not navigate the ships. He is 
not in touch with the work on board of those ships any more than 
I am when it comes down to a question of the distribution of his 
able seamen. 

Mr. Scott. Let me ask you this: The tonnage on the Great Lakes 
has not increased since the passage of the seamen’s act, has it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. According to the reports, it has. 

Mr. Scott. That remained On the Great Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; that the tonnage has increased. 

Mr. Scott. You do not know that of your own knowledge? 

Mr. O’Brien. We will submit a report on that. 

Mr. Scott. You are taking into consideration the amount of ton¬ 
nage that was built on the Great Lakes during the war; but the 
actual operating tonnage on the Great Lakes has not been greater 
since the passage of this act than it was before, has it, to your knowl¬ 
edge? 

Mr. O’Brien. That will be handled by somebody else. 

Mr. Scott. But prior to the passage of the act, will you admit 
there was a very large amount of transportation done on the Great 
Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; of course there was. 

Mr. Scott. Prior to this law being put on the statute books at all ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. The ships were all manned, were they not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. According to the requirements- 


276 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. Of the Department of Commerce ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And, of necessity, in a measure determined by the 
operator of the ship ? In other words, the men who run the ship 
determined how many men they felt they ought to have to enable 
them to run their ships, prior to the law ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I was under the impression the Department of Com¬ 
merce decided that. 

Mr. Scott. Whether that is true, either the Department of Com¬ 
merce determined it or the operator himself determined how many 
men he felt he ought to have on board of the ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The Department of Commerce inspectors deter¬ 
mined that with the operators. 

Mr. Scott. And it was necessity that determined that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And each season it was necessary to go out in the field 
of labor—whether it was firemen, able seamen, water tenders, or 
what not—the ship operators had to go out into the field and pick 
up their crews, did they not? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know of any difficulty in their getting men who 
were willing and anxious to work prior to the passage of this act ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know. I do know we were supplying the 
vessels with men. 

Mr. Scott. Who do you mean by 44 we ” ? The seamen’s union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The union; yes, sir. We were supplying men for the 
vessels for about seven years prior to the passage of the seamen’s act, 
from 1907 or 1908. 

Mr. Scott. What percentage of the operators on the Great Lakes 
came to you and sought your men or men who belonged to the unions ? 

Mr. O’Brien. A majority of them; the vast majority of them. 

Mr. Scott. Prior to the passage of this act ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. The steel company’s ships; they have 100 ships, I 
think- 

Mr. O’Brien. They have more than that. 

Mr. Scott. They have more than that? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. They never have come to your unions and asked you to 
supply those ships with men, have they ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; they did. 

Mr. Scott. When was that? 

Mr. O’Brien. From 1900 to 1907. 

Mr. Scott. But not since? 

Mr. O’Brien. Since 1908, rather. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do your men work on a steel company’s ship ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Edmonds. And do other men who do not belong to the unions 
work on the steel company’s ships? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; but the men do not work on the steel com¬ 
pany’s ships as union men. 

Mr. Edmonds, You mean you prohibit them from working on the 
steel company’s ships as union men ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 277 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; if there is a knowledge they are union men 
they are soon eliminated. 

Mr. Chindblom. By whom? 

Mr. O’Brien. By the steel corporation, I presume. 

Mr. Edmonds. Yet these other lines of ships, say the Goodrich 
Navigation Co.’s ships—was it required by your unions that all men 
on the Goodrich Navigation Co.’s ships should be union men? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. There is nothing in the contract 
we signed last year, sir, despite the statement that has been made, that 
union men should be employed. There is not one word in any con¬ 
tract we signed last year that says all union men shall be employed. 

Mr. Edmonds. What is your practice ? 

Mr. Scott. What are the actual facts? 

Mr. O’Brien. Our practice is, when we do business with those men 
we must—of necessity, in order to have the men do the work we have 
agreed to—the men must be controlled by the organization. We can 
not sign an agreement for people over whom the organization has 
no control. We must of necessity have the right in our meetings to 
pass upon the actions of the men if they do not live up to the agree¬ 
ment signed by our organization with the shipowner. 

Mr. Edmonds. Why was it, then, when the cooks on this ship 
struck, as testified here yesterday, that the firemen went out? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know anything about that, sir; I could not 
tell you. 

Mr. Edmonds. You know it occurred, do you not? 

Mr. O’Brien. I was not in Chicago then; I do not know. 

Mr. Edmonds. You know it occurred, don’t you, in your own 
mind; don’t you know what happens up here on the Lakes? 

Mr. O’Brien. I have heard that occurred. 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. But whether it occurred with the consent of the 
organization or whether these men have been penalized for it, I do 
not know. I am sure they have. I will tell you this, for instance: 
Last year, on some of the boats, the rooms the men were sleeping in 
were up on the upper deck in the passengers’ quarters. They were 
very much better rooms than the rooms assigned to the men, and, in 
the winter especially, the rooms where the men are supposed to sleep 
are extremely cold, and the company, of its own accord, has allowed 
the men to sleep up in those rooms. Some of the men did not want 
to go down into the rooms assigned to them. Now, those rooms have 
been passed by the Inspection Service, and I was called by the owners 
to go down and see the rooms. And I told the men myself that those 
rooms belonged to them, and they were up to the requirements of the 
law, and that they must go down and sleep in those rooms, and that 
the passengers’ quarters were not for them. On numerous occa¬ 
sions, on questions of overtime, the organization has compelled the 
men t live up to the agreement, despite the fact that agreements 
may have been entered into by the men and the captain on the ships in 
an emergency. 

Mr. Mills" Is that line completely unionized? 

Mr. O’Brien. Which line? 

Mr. Mills. The line you were just discussing, the Goodrich Co.? 


278 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you that. I doubt if they are, espe¬ 
cially in the steward’s department, where the men are continually 
going and coming. 

Mr. Mills. Who can tell us that—whether it is completely union¬ 
ized or not? 

Mr. O’Brien. There is nobody who could tell that. 

Mr. Thorp. I can answer that; it is a fact there. 

Mr. Mills. The line is completely unionized? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely, except the freight handlers. 

Mr. Edmonds. Another question right along that line: Do you 
know of any time when the sailors were called out on a strike to 
support the firemen, we will say, or some other union people—the 
cooks or anything like that ? After signing a contract to supply the 
sailors to a line that is completely unionized, has disaffection among 
the firemen or any other branch of the union caused you to call the 
sailors on strike? 

Mr. O’Brien. The sailors, firemen, and cooks are in the Interna¬ 
tional Seamen’s Union. 

Mr. Edmonds. We are not interested in international unions at all, 
here. We are interested in the American seamen’s unions. We do 
not care anything about the international unions. 

Mr. O’Brien. The reason we call it the international union is be¬ 
cause Canada has men on the Lakes and it is an attempt to make- 

Mr. Edmonds. I know there is an attempt to make this an inter¬ 
national union all over the world. I do not care anything about the 
world; I want to know what Americans do. Do you know of any 
case where the sailors were called out to support some other branch 
of the union on a strike ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not unless the agreements of the cooks were being 
abrogated by the vessel. But I do know that is the only time. And 
the cooks and the seamen and the firemen go in and meet the vessel 
owners together, as a rule, and sign these agreements. 

Mr. Edmonds. How about the stewards’ department ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The stewards and cooks are one organization. 

Mr. Edmonds. They are all in together ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you know anything about a union among the 
shipowners on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; there is a very, very strong union known as 
the Lake Carriers’ Association and a passenger boats’ association, 
I think. They are usually lined up pretty strong, and the Lake car¬ 
riers’ organization, also. 

Mr. Bankhead. They have an organization for the protection of 
their mutual interests, for the protection of freight and passengers, 
do they? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. They have their regular meetings, organizations, 
and by-laws? 

Mr." O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. They act together for their mutual profit and bene¬ 
fit, do they ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They do, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do they have joint traffic arrangements and uni¬ 
form freight rates among those organizations? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 279 

Mr. O’Brien. As a rule; yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. And when one line lowers them, the others do, 
and when one raises them the others raise them; is that the practice ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not say that about passenger boats ex- 
actly, but I do know the rate for ore is set at a certain time and the 
rate for coal is set at a certain time, and that is the rate—and the rate 
for lumber. 

Mr. Gahn. The ships do not set those rates, altogether? 

Mr. O’Brien^ I do not know as to that. 

Mr. Scott, "lou have answered Mr. Bankhead by saying the oper¬ 
ators—-and I am not interested in the operators—have an organiza¬ 
tion. lou, as members of the seamen’s union, the cook’s union, the 
firemen’s union, the water tenders’ union—in fact, every living soul 
aboard that ship, in the management of the ship, makes a contract 
with the operator at the opening of navigation. Is not that true, 
usually ? You can answer that yes or no. 

Mr. O’Brien. You mean on the passenger boats? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; I mean on the passenger boats. Is it not usually 
true you all make a contract with the operator ? 

Mr. O’Brien. As a rule. 

Mr. Scott. He owns his boat. If he violates his contract with you, 
you can sue him, can you not, and recover damages incident to the 
loss of your time ? 

Mr. O’Brien. We never have done that. 

Mr. Scott. But I say you could sue him and recover damages for 
a violation of the contract. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know whether we could or not. 

Mr. Scott. Supposing you quit? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Supposing you quit the boat for some reason you think 
is good and you compel him to tie his boat up at the dock. What 
can he do to compel you, who have made a contract with him at the 
opening of navigation, to carry out the terms of your contract ? 

Mr. O’Brien. If I break my contract, if I in any way infringe upon 
the rules and regulations set down by the Department of Commerce, 
which the union abides by, I can be fined; I can be put in irons. 

Mr. Scott. By whom? 

Mr. O’Brien. By the master of the ship. 

Mr. Scott. No; but I am talking about when you get to the dock 
now. You have made, your year’s contract. If some disagreement 
occurs between the operator or somebody in connection with the 
operation of the ship has got into a controversy with some member 
of your department, which represents one union, or they have gotten 
into a controversy with the cooks on the ship or with some of the fire¬ 
men, in consequence of which the particular class on the ship ag¬ 
grieved steps ashore; suppose it is the cooks, and no disagreement 
has occurred between your department, the seamen’s union, and the 
operators, you are in perfect harmony; they have not violated your 
contract at all—in actual practice the minute the violation occurs as 
to any of them don’t they call out the others and call a strike ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They do not, sir. 

Mr. Scott. I want you to explain why that is not true. 

Mr. O’Brien. If there is anything like that occurs, no one has a 
right to order any of the men ashore of the other departments outside 


280 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

of the particular department that is affected. And the mode of 
procedure is this, that as a rule we go down and find out what the 
trouble is- 

Mr. Scott. That is the representatives of all the unions ( 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. And if the shipowner is right, we will 
compel the cooks or the firemen or the seamen to go back to work, 
as far as we can forcibly compel anybody to go to work. That is 
the mode of procedure and that is what happens as a rule. For in¬ 
stance, there was a strike of cooks last year, but the seamen and 
firemen were not on strike, simply because of the fact the seamen and 
firemen did not agree to have any strike and would not go on strike 
because the cooks went on strike. That was last year on the Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. But if the cooks go ashore and the boat is laid up and 
your seamen are ready to go to work, you collect your pay, do you 
hot? You are there ready to go to work, and although one member 
of a coordinate organization, affiliated organization, steps out on the 
dock, if all the other affiliated organizations are there ready to go to 
work they are obliged to be compensated because they are ready and 
willing to undertake their work? 

Mr. O’Brien. If they are working, Congressman: yes; if they are 
working. You must remember it is not a question of whether they 
are ready and willing, but they must be working. 

Mr. Scott. You have just called a strike on the ships on the Lakes, 
have you not? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Is that your union. It is the international union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. That is on the Atlantic coast and on the Pacific 
coast. 

Mr. Scott. It is the international union. You have tied up our 
ships ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; that is not so. We did not call the strike; 
we were locked out. 

Mr. Scott. I just want to know what there is to it. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would rather have Mr. Foruseth answer that ques¬ 
tion because he is more familiar with it; but I know it is a lock¬ 
out and not a strike. 

Mr. Scott. Do you like a system of making a contract for a whole 
year which assures your men continuous employment and a certain 
amount of wages during an entire season—do you like that system? 

Mr. O’Brien. Certainly. 

Mr. Scott. Then what objection have you to organizing and in¬ 
corporating with a certain amount of capital stock, to insure your 
carrying out your end of the contract, the same as you can compel the 
shipowner to carry out his contract ? Have you any objection to that ? 

Mr. O’Brien. You mean to incorporate? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; to incorporate, so that you will be an incorporated 
body liable, under the laws of the country, just the same as any other 
organization, in a damage suit to compel you to carry out the con¬ 
tracts you have made and signed and agreed to carry out. Have you 
any objection to it? 

Mr. Fitruseth. Leave that to me. 

Mr. Scott. I would like to get his opinion. 

Mr. O’Brien. Mr. Scott, you must remember that I am only a 
sailor; I am not a financier, neither am I a lawyer. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’9 ACT. 281 

Mr. Scott. You represent one of the great unions and you are the 
head of the union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am not. 

Mr. Scott. I thought you were head of the seamen’s union. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am general secretary of the sailors’ union. 

Mr. Scott. You hold what position in the seamen’s union? 

Mr. O’Brien. I am a member of the union, that is all. 

Mr. Scott. You are not a representative? 

Mr. O’Brien. I represent the men; I was sent here by the men 
themselves. 

Mr. Scott. You are not holding an official position? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; I am not yet. 

Mr. Mills. But you are representing them here ? 

Mr. O’Brien. We could not send the whole union down here. 

Mr. Mills. And you are down here to represent the men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; I am down here to represent the men. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you not think, Mr. Scott, that this whole matter 
up there is largely a matter between the shipowners and the seamen’s 
union rather than a grievance against the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Scott. No; I do not think the seamen’s union had anything to 
do with the extension of the season. I was dumfounded by their 
position to-day, because I could not understand why any class of men 
could object to an increase of their wage—that is, an extension of 
time which would allow them to work more days than they otherwise 
could or would work. They have not had any trouble up there par¬ 
ticularly, except in so far as the unions took advantage of the present 
law. If you will bear with me—I want to answer your question and 
I want to answer it fairly—until this law was put on the statute 
books we people up in that country went out into the open market 
and hired men in consequence of their ability. The fact that they had 
a blue ticket meant nothing; a man who had never seen a blue ticket 
might be a better seaman than nine-tenths of the men who had one; 
so we went into the open market and hired men. We had an open 
shop, and a man was employed in consequence of his ability. We 
run our ships. The accidents before the law and since the law are 
comparable—no w T orse and no better. I think that is a fair state¬ 
ment. But when this law came on the statute books they compelled 
us to unionize every one of our passenger-line ships up and down the 
Lakes. Prior to that time the captains and the mates and some of 
the second mates were not unionized at all. But it resulted in this, 
that every single living soul on the boat became unionized in con¬ 
sequence of the fact that the seamen’s union had been sufficiently 
powerful to get a law on the statute books recognizing their identity 
and compelling the operator, by law, which he had done voluntarily 
in large measure before, to put a certain character of men on board 
the ship, to wit, 65 per cent of his entire forward deck crew had to 
be able seamen. And the question of determining the able seamen, 
as a result of that law, was more quickly determined and more accu¬ 
rately determined by the fact that he held a union card. As a result it 
has accomplished the unionization of the entire personnel of the ship. 
Now, that has resulted in this: Each year contracts have been made. 
The captains have organized; the mates have organized; the second 
mates have organized; and so on down the line. And they have been 


232 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

obliged to make a contract with the unions at the commencement of 
the season. 

Mr. Bankhead. They do not like that much? 

Mr. Scott. No; it has resulted in this: It has resulted in the 
strangulation of the passenger service and the freight service. I am 
not interested in the steel company’s boats or boats of that character 
that make long runs, but I am interested and my people are interested 
in the maintenance and continuation of the short runs, known as the 
passenger and package-freight business. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Is there not any way of getting this blue ticket 
as an able seaman, unless a man belongs to the union ? 

Mr. Scott. It has resulted in an imposition, because of this fact— 
I do not want to make a speech on it- 

Mr. Bankhead. I would be glad to have your statement go in, 
because I have gotten the impression that is one of the real troubles 
in this controversy. 

Mr. Scott. It is one of the troubles, but it is not the major trouble. 
It has resulted in this: The minute you, by statute, recognized a 
class, the other man employed necessarily said to himself, “lam a 
fool not to so demean myself that I can participate in the increase of 
compensation that has resulted from this particular recognition of 
the seamen’s union by legislation. Therefore, they all organized, 
and it has resulted in the unionization of the whole ship. Con¬ 
sequently—you know human nature is this, that people will not 
go down, but they will go up, and once you have granted a conces¬ 
sion, they never will consent to its release, no matter how bad it will 
be for them. That is human nature. 

Mr. Bankhead. We all do that. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; we all do it; they are no different than we are. 
So that the situation has increased all the time, and wages have 
been going up and up. 

Mr. Briggs. You said the recognition of the union by legislation. 
Is there any recognition in the statute of that union ? 

Mr. Scott. Oh, yes. . 

Mr. Briggs. It is specially recognized? 

Mr. Scott. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Briggs. Where is it in the statute ? 

Mr. Scott. Sixty-five per cent of able seamen. 

Mr. Briggs. That does not say anything about that union. 

Mr. Scott. It has resulted in that. 

Mr. Briggs. I know that is your contention; but the statute does 
not say anything about the union. This is the effect, but there is not 
anything in the statute? 

Mr. Scott. The fact it is cloudy outside is not positive proof it is 
raining, but, if you go outside and it is pouring, that is conclusive 
of the fact that the clouds are giving forth rain. 

Mr. Briggs. Is there anything in the act though that able sea¬ 
men have to go through a union in order to be regarded as able sea¬ 
men? 

Mr. Scott. No. 

Mr. Briggs. There is nothing in that act at all ? 

Mr. Scott. No. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 283 

Mr. Briggs. Does not the act itself designate what shall consti¬ 
tute an able seaman? Does not even your bill so designate an able 
seaman? 

Mr. Scott. There is no question about it. 

Mr. Briggs. That is so whether they belong to the union or not? 

Mr. Scott. No. 

Mr. Briggs. That is to say, you have to belong to the union in 
order to get the classification ? 

Mr. Scott. No. All I want to do is to correct a situation that in 
a measure accomplishes an unfortunate situation. I do not say the 
unions are responsible for it; it may be psychological, but it is a 
fact; it is not conjecture, but at the present time they have a strangle 
hold on the Great Lakes and, possibly without their knowledge, I 
hope it is without their knowledge, they are strangling the very thing 
that is feeding them, and not only 'will they be sufferers in the end 
and the ship operators be sufferers in the end, but the people I am 
trying to represent here who ship their potatoes and their wheat and 
their vegetables and their peaches on these ships are going to be the 
ones who will be the great sufferers. That is the thing I am attempt¬ 
ing to correct. If I could figure out any 6ther way it could be done, 
and certainly we do not want to decrease the efficiency of our ships, 
I would do it; but we had just as good efficiency before this act 
went into effect as we have had since. 

Mr. Bankhead. In your last measure, which you introduced in 
Congress at the last session, the only provision there was for the ex¬ 
tension of their passenger season. 

Mr. Scott. I will say this, in all frankness, and I think I ought 
to say it in fairness to Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Conway, that those two 
gentlemen have played the game absolutely fair with me. I told 
them I would meet them halfway on the proposition, and that par¬ 
ticular feature was the most vital in connection with the particular 
traffic in my section of the State and I was looking after my particu¬ 
lar section rather than some other section. They could not agree 
with me; they were opposed to the provision. They thought, it 
ought not to go in. But in view of the other things I asked, which 
I have asked in this bill, they said, “ We could not, even by indirec¬ 
tion, consent to this; but we are not viciously opposed to that exten¬ 
sion of the season up there and will not oppose it, if you eliminate 
the other two sections.” We were in the short session of Congress-— 

Mr. Edmonds. Let me ask Mr. Scott something about his situation, 
and that is when the La Follette bill was passed, the union, of course, 
was strengthened. In order to get men, the operators had to close 
contracts with the unions. They closed those contracts with the 
unions, and in closing the contracts they were compelled to take all 
of their men from the union. In fact, the outside men had to go into 
the union in order to get on the ships. I just wanted to supplement 
his statement, because he has talked about the strangle hold without 
explaining what the strangle hold was. 

Mr. Mills. Is it not a fact that any test which is entirely based on 
time enormously strengthens the hands of any union ? 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. Because, if they are smart enough—and after hearing 
Mr. O’Brien, I am not going to question their smartness—they will 



284 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 


corral the free men and that makes it impossible to get anything but 
union men . 

Mr. Edmonds. To be sure. 

Mr. Mills. If you are going to make the sole test length of service. 

Mr. Scott. The statement was made positively, not indirectly but 
positively made, and on many, many occasions during the original 
hearings, by Mr. Furuseth, and every single representative of the 
union made the statement, when the La Toilette bill was passed, that 
it was written by the unions; it was a union measure and no outside 
individual had any participation in it. They insisted on taking 
credit for it, and they have had credit for it. 

Mr. Furuseth. No; I won’t stand for that. 

Mr. Scott. That was the situation that everybody else recognized. 
They insisted that it was formulated as a union proposition and as a 
result they have received just credit for its adoption. 

Mr. Furuseth. Mr. Chairman, may I be permitted—this goes a 
little too far—may I be permitted to make just one statement? 

Mr. Scott. Sure; if that is not a correct statement, I think you 
ought. 

Mr. Furuseth. It is absolutely incorrect. 

Mr. Scott. Who w^rote the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The Committee on Merchant Marine and Fish¬ 
eries. The first original draft of the so-called seamen’s act was 
made in 1892 by a committee of seamen on the Pacific coast. 

Mr. S'cott. You participated in that, did you? 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not. I was an officer of the union at the time, 
but I was not on the committee officially. Now, then, that act was 
changed, and changed, and changed, and changed. We were 21 
years bringing evidence before the committees of Congress. Finally 
the act was taken up by the Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries and it was submitted to a subcommittee and the subcom¬ 
mittee drew the act. Then, after it passed the House in that shape, 
it went to the Senate and we had hearings lasting for more than two 
months, altogether. 

We have never claimed that it was a union measure; we have never 
claimed that it was for the purpose of the union; we have never 
claimed responsibility for it; but we have claimed we were glad 
that it was passed. There are men who have given me some credit 
in this matter, and some credit possibly is due me, but, as far as the 
statements made by Congressman Scott here are concerned, he can 
find nothing in the record to substantiate them. I have the record 
here, all of the hearings. He can find nothing in the record to justify 
the statements he has made. 

Mr. Eosenbloom. As that matter seems to be of interest to the com¬ 
mittee, my recollection is I heard Judge Hardy say day before yester¬ 
day, sitting right across the table here, that he and another member 
of this committee had drafted this bill and that Judge Alexander had 
more to do with it—although it was called the La Follette bill, 
that it was he and Judge Alexander who really drew the bill. 

Mr. Scott. That is true; and Mr. Alexander lives in Missouri and 
Mr. Hardy in Texas. Neither one of them have any ships in their 
districts at all. 

Mr. Eosenbloom. But I recall that statement by Judge Hardy. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 285 

Mr. Bankhead. 5^ ou do not take the position that a man who rep¬ 
resents an inland district has not any intelligent judgment in regard 
to shipping? 

Mr. Scott. Oh, bless my soul, no. 

Mr. Bankhead. That might be the inference to be drawn. 

Mr. Scott. No ; but I want to say this: At that time I remember 
this bill being submitted and nobody on the Great Lakes had any 
idea that an effort was going to be made to so curtail the operation 
of the ships. You heard a gentleman yesterday say they came down 
here and said there was no occasion for it on the Great Lakes, and 
Judge Hardy frankly admitted that the statement was made back 
and forth at the time and that the statement made by the com¬ 
mittee was that if it did injure them on the Lakes the committee 
wanted them to come back and show why it should be amended in 
part so as to relieve the situation. And my thought in that connec¬ 
tion was this only—and I think you will be obliged to admit it—I 
admit I do not know as much about your district as I do about my 
own, and l will insist you do not know as much about my district as 
I do. 

Mr. Bankhead. Naturally. 

Mr. Scott. It would be very natural. I do not think it is an infer¬ 
ence of any lack of knowledge on your part at all, and I hope you 
will not so interpret it. 

Mr. Bankhead. I was not involved in the equation. 

Mr. Scott. I was talking about Judge Alexander and Judge 
Hardy. 

Mr. Bankhead. But it is an unfortunate thing that men who have 
no navigation in their districts have largely participated in the draft¬ 
ing and passage of this act. Mr. Furuseth, were you present all the 
time during those hearings ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I was not—all the time. 

Mr. Bankhead. In looking over the record I noticed your partici¬ 
pation— 

Mr. Furuseth. I was present during the public hearings here. In 
reference to asking me questions, there is not a question dealing with 
this matter I am not willing to answer, and not only answer, as I do, 
from the record; but when the time comes, if I am permitted, as I 
hope I will be, I will be open to all those questions on every shape 
and phase of it. But at this time I only arose to correct Mr. Scott’s 
statement, because it was so outrageously different from the record 
itself that I could not let it go. 

Mr. Scott. Then, as a union, you do not claim any credit for the 
passage of this bill ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Certainly not. 

Mr. Scott. Will you let me ask you this one question? 

Mr. Furuseth. Please do not ask me any more questions now; it is 
not fair. 

Mr. Scott. All right. 

Mr. Bankhead. Just one matter in reference to this locality. Mr. 
La Follette represented a section of the country up there that had 
some interest in seafaring matters, did he not ? 

Mr. Scott. No. So far as his representation of the Great Lakes 
is concerned, it is comparable to his representation of the United 
States Government during the war [Applause.] 



286 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Bankhead. I just wanted to get an expression of opinion on 
that phase of it. 

Mr. Scott. I am very glad to express my opinion on Mr. La Fol- 
lette at any time. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Edmonds. I think Judge Alexander probably knows as much 
about ships as any man in the country, and I recall the hearings on 
the La Follette bill, which Mr. Furuseth remembers, and I am puz¬ 
zled by Mr. Furuseth’s denial of Mr. Scott’s statement that this was a 
union measure. I thought it was considered it was a union measure, 
and I think it was considered a union measure, but whether that was 
ever testified to or not I do not know. 

Mr. Briggs. Was that bill unanimously reported out of this com¬ 
mittee ? 

Mr. Edmonds. No; it was not. There were three portions of it on 
which there was disagreement. The first time it was reported out by 
this committee those three portions were left out of the bill. It 
went through the House and Senate and went to the President, and 
the President vetoed it. Then it was reintroduced with the three sec¬ 
tions in, or it came back to the committee somehow and those three 
sections were put back into the bill, and in putting back those sec¬ 
tions the committee were not unanimous. I want to say, further, the 
Lake men had a full hearing here at that time, both the ocean and the 
Lake men. 

Mr. Scott. But there were no shippers here. 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes; I think the gentleman here [Mr. Thorp] was 
before the committee. 

Mr. Scott. He is not a shipper; he is a boat operator. 

Mr. Chindbloom. To complete the history of this interesting leg¬ 
islation, will you be good enough to tell us what those three sections 
were which were omitted from the original act and on account of 
which the President vetoed the act and which subsequently were in¬ 
serted so as to receive Executive approval? 

Mr. Edmonds. I will try and do that. I know one of them was 
about foreign vessels entering United States ports. That was taken 
out of the original bill by the committee and was afterwards put 
back. That was one of the sections, was it not, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. If you please, it requires quite an explanation to 
show all the reasons why the President vetoed it. As a matter of 
fact, the bill that the President vetoed was much worse for the ship¬ 
owner than the bill that finally became a law. 

Mr. Scott. We admit that this is bad. 

Mr. Furuseth. I say it was much worse, because that bill con¬ 
tained a provision that every man who is at the wheel or on lookout 
on board of ship must have three watches, and not two. That was in 
the bill that originally went to the President, but it will take some 
time to explain it, and I will be mighty glad to explain it. But you 
are asking men who w T ere not here and have not read the record on 
this question. 

Mr. Briggs. Going back to the point where we had quite a consid¬ 
erable digression: We were talking about nine extra men for which 
there was no use. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. So far as you know, I think you stated there was no 
reason why those men could not be assigned to other duties ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 287 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. That is, cleaning up the ship, scrubbing the decks, 
painting the ship, and certain other duties indicated by you—pursers, 
or anything else. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. When these ships on which you work are in port, 
what do the men do ? I mean by that, can they be called on for any 
duty, or are they off during that time? 

Mr. O’Brien. They are working in watches. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean—whether it is at sea, so-called, or whether in 
port on the Lakes—do these watches continue just the same? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. During the whole month ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; unless a freight ship would be in port 
maybe for three days, then the men are working a 9-hour day, 
provided they are allowed to; but in the vast bulk of the freight 
ships—the law says that—and in the vast bulk of the freight ships 
the conditions for the ordinary seaman and able seamen are re¬ 
versed, for the ordinary seamen especially, because then they are 
placed watch and watch in port, which means a 12-hour day and at 
sea they are worked all day. The law says that the deck crew must 
be divided into two watches at sea, and in port, 9 hours, exclusive 
of the anchor watch; that is, in case you were anchored, you had to 
stand watch for two hours or an hour during the night and that 
that hour would be included in the hours you would work during the 
day. The reverse occurs when ships run into the different ports and 
the deck hands or ordinary seamen are placed watch and watch 
instead of being on all day. That occurs on freight boats. On the 
passenger boats, I think the deck hands are on all day; they are not 
watch and watch at all. 

And in connection with this thing, Mr. Congressman, Mr. Thorp 
carries more men than the law compels him on some of his ships. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you know why? 

Mr. O’Brien. I will read his answer, if I will be allowed. 

Mr. Briggs. All right. 

Mr. O’Brien. The question came up— I refer to Mr. Thorp’s state¬ 
ment in the last hearings—and Mr. Thorp answered “We do not 
have to carry more than 16. We have done it voluntarily on one 
boat only.” Now, the reason that they carried more than 16 men 
is not because of the fact that they could not find work for 16 men, 
but they had work for more than the amount of men that the law 
requires them to carry. And that is what Mr. Thorp testified at 
the last hearings, because exactly the same question came up about 
the men not having anything to do. 

Mr. Mills. May I ask a question: Is there any question of over¬ 
time in any of your agreements ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There is; yes. 

Mr. Mills. Does overtime apply at sea ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not in cases of emergency; no. 

Mr. Mills. What would determine what was a question of 
emergency ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, if the vessel was in any danger, if there was a 
fire and the cargo was in danger or the ship was in danger and the 


288 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

passengers in danger, the loss of the ship or the lives of passengers 
were in danger. We specifically state that in the agreement. 

Mr. Mills. That in cases of emergency overtime does not apply? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. 

Mr. Mills. But in any except cases of emergency the one-half 
overtime pay applies for over eight hours; is that in your agree¬ 
ment ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the firemen’s agreement we had with the people 
there was only 40 cents per hour for overtime; and in the seamen’s 
agreement-- 

Mr. Briggs. That does not seem to answer the question Mr. Mills 
asked you, as I understood it. His question was, after eight hours, 
whether overtime was charged. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; in the firemen’s end of it. 

Mr. Briggs. I am not talking about the firemen; I am talking 
about the seamen’s agreement. 

Mr. O’Brien. Only last season it was in effect on the Lakes for 
the sailors. 

Mr. Mills. The 8-hour agreement is simply an agreement between 
the unions and the owners. There is nothing in the law which 
makes 8 hours a day, is there ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; that was an agreement between the owners 
and the seamen themselves. 

Mr. Chindblom. Where there are three men for three watches, 
that makes an 8-hour shift, does it not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. That does not apply, does it, to the seamen? 

Mr. Briggs. It does not apply to the seamen; it applies to the 
firemen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. It applies to the firemen in the law, and in the 
agreement we had with the ship owners last year and which is work¬ 
ing now on the passenger boats, we have three watches in the able 
seamen too. 

Mr. Briggs. That is not required in the La Follette Act? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; it has nothing at all to do with it. 

Mr. Briggs. That arises out of an agreement between the operators 
and the unions? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Free. If, for instance, those boats are required to employ a 
nonunion cook, we will say, your men refuse to take the boat out, 
do they not? 

Mr. O’Brien. The man is given an opportunity to join the union. 
We do not say he must join the union, but in fact, there are hundreds 
of men who go down and join the union. 

Mr. Free. But take this situation: Suppose you are about to take 
a boat out and you discover a nonunion cook being employed, would 
your men refuse to take it out or would they take it out ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could see the men would object possibly sailing 
with the nonunion cook, unless he was going to become a member of 
the organization. 

Mr. Mills. But if he did not become a member of the organiza¬ 
tion— 

Mr. O Brien. If he did not become a member of the organization, 
he would be given an opportunity- 





AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 289 

Mr. Mills. He would leave peaceably or the boat would not leave 
at all? 

Mr. O'Brien. Well, there are numbers of cooks who are not union 
men, on board of the ships where we have union men, and there are 
numbers of able seamen on boats where we have union men and 
these other men are not union men and they work together. 

Mr. Mills. That is true of ships that are not completely union¬ 
ized. but take this Goodrich Co. which it has been testified is com¬ 
pletely unionized. If a nonunion man came aboard that ship, as a 
matter of practice your men would refuse to take the ship out as 
long as that nonunion man was there, would they not? 

Mr. O'Brien. I do not think so. I do not think they would re¬ 
fuse to take the ship out. They might talk to the men and want 
them to go into the union, and wlien they got into the next port they 
would report it to the organization. But we supply these ships with 
our men- 

Mr. Mills. As a matter of policy—you have been a member of the 
union for a good many years? 

Mr. O'Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. As a matter of policy, would or would not the union 
consider that sufficient cause either for striking or refusing to take 
the boat out ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, we have no closed-shop agreement 
with these gentlemen. 

Mr. Mills. No; I know you have not. But you try to make it one, 
as a matter of practice ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Naturally we do, of course. We try to organize every 
man we possibly can. 

Mr. Mills. Then, can you not answer that question? If it was 
attempted to put nonunion men on ships that were completely union¬ 
ized, as a matter of practice you would refuse to take the ship out? 

Mr. O’Brien. They would be working—the men aboard the ship 
would be displacing other men. 

Mr. Mills. Yes. Suppose they did. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would view it then that the men have a sufficient 
right to say that the men should not be discharged without having 
something against them. 

Mr. Mills. We are not arguing the question of discharge. A very 
simple question has been asked you. I do not know whether you 
care to answer it or not. 

Mr. O'Brien. I have never seen it occur. 

Mr. Free. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Thorp? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes: but I was not in Chicago then. I have no doubt 
the thing came off as Mr. Thorp stated; I do not know. I was in 
Buffalo then. 

Mr. Free. Is there anything in these agreements to the effect that 
nothing but union men will be employed on the boats? 

Mr. O’Brien. No. sir; there is not, and we will send you a copy of 
that agreement. 

Mr. Nolan. I have wired my office for a copy of that agreement 
and it will be here to-morrow. 


48420—21-19 



290 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN'S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. And if there is anything in there that in any way 
says that union men must be employed, you can strike all my testi¬ 
mony from the record. 

Mr. Jefferis. What is the method of selecting men that the owners 
of the vessel employ? Do they just ask the union to send so many 
men, or can they select their own men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The captains and the mates select the men. In 
fact, they are shipped right off the dock. In fact, Mr. Thorp’s men 
never ship out of Chicago; they are shipped off the dock. The men 
are sailing on his boats all the time. As to the next question of who 
employes them, we do not say how he shall employ them. Is not that 
true, Mr. Thorp ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; but we have to employ union men, and you know 
it. Absolutely we can not carry any but union men on those boats 
in any department. And for the benefit of Mr. Mills, I w T ant to re¬ 
iterate what I said the other day that before we had any agreement 
with the cooks at all, but did have agreements with other unions, 
that because of some disagreement between the head cook and steward 
they went ashore and got their men to come down there. The firemen 
stood on the dock and would not take the boat out, and we were really 
compelled to reemploy the men with whom we had a disagreement. 
And as they came down on the dock the firemen stood there and said, 
“ Didn’t we fix it for you; didn’t we fix it for you ? ” I will take an 
absolute oath to that. 

Mr. Conway. I do not think it is fair to let that go by at this 
time. Did the firemen’s union have an agreement with you at this 
time ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. We had a written agreement and we were 
employing your men, and you personally, Mr. Conway, know that 
absolutely, and I will take oath to that, too. 

Mr. Briggs. This only makes for an argument between the two 
witnesses at this time, and I would like to ask you, in the shipping of 
the men, do the seamen sign ship’s articles like they do when they go 
on ocean vessels? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; not in the same way at all; they do not 
sign before the commissioner. 

Mr. Briggs. They have no ship’s articles to sign before the com¬ 
missioners ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They just go on the pay roll. 

Mr. Briggs. How far from the shore do these vessels go that you 
refer to—the one on which you sailed, for instance? 

Mr. O’Brien. They go right up through the lakes, the Tionesta 
and passenger boats. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean how far from shore do they go—5 miles from 
shore, 10 miles from shore, 50 miles from shore, or how far ? 

Mr. O’Brien. There are times when they are out of sight of land 
altogether. 

Mr. Briggs. How far is that? 

Mr. O’Brien. Sometimes 10 miles, sometimes 15 miles—it depends 
on the weather. 

Mr. Briggs. On your route—you have a certain route you pursue 
from Buffalo to Duluth, say? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 291 

Mr. Briggs. How far does that take you from land on your voy¬ 
age? 

Mr. O’Brien. All the way from 3 to 20 miles offshore. 

Mr. Briggs. From 3 to 20 miles? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you also about launching the boats. We 
had quite a long and extended discussion on that yesterday about re¬ 
quiring able seamen to launch the boats, but I never did hear just 
how many able seamen it took to launch a lifeboat. Just how many 
does it take, say, for a lifeboat holding 30 persons, that is testified to 
as being the number that the lifeboats hold, the average size of the 
lifeboats on the larger ships. 

Mr. O’Brien. To lower a boat with passengers, and to lower them 
without drowning people- 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I am talking about; I am not talking 
about lowering them and drowning people, I am talking about low¬ 
ering them without drowning people, safely. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. You need two men, two able seamen, two 
men who understand how to surge lines on the pins. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean two able seamen? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Can two able seamen lower a lifeboat with 30 people 
in the boat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Do they need any assistance ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Of course they need assistance; they need assistance 
in taking off the cover and in clearing up the deck behind them. 

Mr. Briggs. How many men on the ropes at each end ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Only one man. The reason you see more than one 
man on the ropes is because of the fact they are not confident of them¬ 
selves. 

Mr. Briggs. I am not talking about the men not being confident 
of themselves at all; I am talking about able seamen. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. Only one, and not only for a boat with 
30 people but only one with a boat for 60 people. The man turns 
the rope around the pins, and when he surges it properly he can 
lower the boat better than with a man assisting him, because when 
there are two men they do not lower together, because the man 
behind has not got the weight and he might want to surge the rope 
when the one in front is not surging it. 

Mr. Briggs. How many men would you have on the ropes if you 
were lowering a lifeboat containing 30 people ? 

Mr. O’Brien. One; just one able seaman and perhaps one man 
besides him who may be clearing up the ropes. 

Mr. Briggs. But only one man playing it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Are the appliances and tackles used there of such a 
character that one man can control the weight of those boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. The tackle and poles are so constructed that one man 
can control that boat, at each end of the boat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. There are two men on the boat ? 


292 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Two trained men; two able seamen? 

Mr. O’Brien. They must be trained men for it; they must be 
skilled men. You could not put anybody at that kind of work. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Could not a certificated lifeboat man do it? 

Mr. O’Brien. A certificated lifeboat man could not do it; he has 
not got the experience. 

Mr. Briggs. I understand your contention is very much along this 
line, that there is the same difference between an able seaman and a 
certificated lifeboat man as there is between a trained fireman in your 
city fire department and a volunteer. 

Mr. O’Brien. Just the same; yes, sir. 

Mr. Free. Do I understand the lifeboat men are not unionized; is 
that true? 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, they are. 

Mr. Free. They are unionized, too? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; in the deck department they are, in the 
seamen, and in the fireroom—everybody there is in the firemen’s 
union. And in the cooks’ department they are in the cooks' union. 

Mr. Free. Why, then, do the owners prefer to take the lifeboat 
men instead of able seamen ? Do they have to pay them less money ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Naturally. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Lake boats, you say, the able seamen are only 
required on the decks; is not that it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I said that the able seamen are on deck. 

Mr. Gahn. Now, I can not get it through my head—I have seen 
these Lake boats operate and have been on them—what the difference 
is between the able seaman and the certificated lifeboat man, so far 
as their duties on deck are concerned, outside of the operating of the 
wheel, as was testified to yesterday. 

Mr. O’Brien. Why, there are numerous other duties. 

Mr. Gahn. What are the duties of the able seaman that the 
certificated lifeboat man can not do, outside of operating the wheel, 
that you testified to ? 

Mr. O’Brien. An able seaman must be able to sound—take Lake 
soundings. 

Mr. Gahn. Can not a lifeboat man do that? 

Mr. O’Brien. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Gaiin. Why not ? 

Mr. O’Brien. In the first place, he has never had the opportunity. 
The vast majority of certificated lifeboat men are cooks and flunkies 
and bell boys. Those men have no opportunity to learn to take 
soundings with a lead sounding line. 

Mr. Gaiin. Who does take the soundings on the Lake boats? Do 
not the deck hands do it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; the able seamen do it as a rule. 

Mr. Gahn. Are not the deck hands able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir; they are ordinary seamen. Those men are 
coming along and, if given the opportunity, will develop into able 
seamen. 

Mr. Gahn. I would like to understand what Mr. Mills tried to 
bring out yesterday—why they need able seamen on the boat. What 
makes him so much superior to the lifeboat man? 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 293 


Mr. O’Brien. In order to get something concrete, because to go 
into the ramifications and qualifications of an able seaman would 
require quite a little time, we have it boiled down right here. 

Mr. Briggs. Just read it. 

Mr. O’Brien. The ship and crew- 

Mr. Mills. From what are you reading? 

Mr. O’Brien. From “A message to seamen. A call to the sea 
and to seamanship,” issued by the International Seamen’s Union of 
America at the time the country needed seamen. 

The ratings of sailors, men in the deck department, are: Boy, ordinary sea¬ 
men, able seamen (quartermaster or boatswain, etc., are able seamen assigned 
to special work). The able seaman is the unit of skill and efficiency in the 
deck department. The boy and ord'nary seaman is learning to be an able 
seaman and from among tlie able seamen who have studied navigation, comes 
the officers and future masters of vessels. 

The skill and experience in the engine department is of a different kind. 

I do not think I will read that part. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, as I understand it, the difference 
between able seamen and ordinary seamen, is that the ordinary 
seaman is serving an apprenticeship during a certain length of time 
after which, after he serves satisfactorily for a certain length of 
time, he gets to be an able seaman. The able seaman is one who has 
served an apprenticeship for a certain length of time, which is satis- 
factor y and, at the end of that time, if he shows the qualifications 
and he is sufficiently expert to do the things that are expected of him, 
he becomes an able seaman. 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. He acquires that skill, of course, and has 
served a certain specified length of time. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I say. Take a man in the plumbing 
trade, after he has served a sufficiently long apprenticeship he goes 
along in the trade and finally becomes a plumber? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. But if he does not know anything, he becomes an 
able seaman in time, merely by the fact he has served a certain 
period of time ? 

Mr. Briggs. Is that true? 

Mr. O’Brien. It may be true in that sense; he may be a man who 
served on ship for 18 months, or the ordinary length of time. 

Mr. Briggs. Can they do that? 

Mr. O’Brien. They can do that. I think they would not be car¬ 
ried on the ship that long if they were not competent. 

Mr. Mills. But if he was, he would get the rating of able seaman 
simply by making affidavit that he had served that length of time. 

Mr. O’Brien. That is true. We asked for an examination for able 
seamen, as a matter of fact, in the last bill, and it was denied us. 

Mr. Mills. As a matter of fact, the only test is length of time? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; only time. 

Mr. Briggs. Can any man of ordinary intelligence stay on a ship 
for three years without learning something, unless he is fit to be in an 
insane asylum? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not think so. In fact, the ordinary seaman 
could be rated as a boy- 

Mr. Gahn. Can any certified lifeboat man stay on board a ship 
without absorbing some knowledge as to the operation of the boat? 




294 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. O’Brien. Not if he is in the deck department. He will absorb 
knowledge in the same manner as the ordinary seaman does. The 
ordinary seaman is a certificated man. 

Mr. Gahn. Can every able seaman lower a lifeboat ? 

Mr. O’Brien. If he can not, he should be able to do it, and I am 
sure he would not be carried very long by the officers if he was not 
able to do the work. 

Mr. Gahn. The mere fact you call him an able seaman does not 
qualify him to lower a lifeboat, does it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. No; calling him an able seaman does not mean any¬ 
thing at all. When he goes on board ship, he has certain work to do, 
and if he is not qualified to do that work you can rest assured he 
will very soon be found out and not carried by the officers of the 
ship, and especially by his own shipmates, who would object to his 
presence there, because it would mean they would have to do his 
work as well as their own. 

Mr. Scott. They did not do that when they had this controversy 
with the cooks. Evidently the cook dropped some soap into the 
soup or something, and he came back on. Now, suppose an ineffi¬ 
cient, incompetent, and brainless seaman gets on a ship and the cap¬ 
tain attempts to dismiss him- 

Mr. Briggs. I never heard the cook dropped a cake of soap into 
the soup. I have never heard what the reason was for the contro¬ 
versy with the cooks. 

Mr. Scott. I am only surmising. 

Mr. O’Brien. If I may be permitted, I would like to conclude my 
testimony by reading into the record what the term “ able seaman ” 
means: 

The term “ able seaman,” as used on board any ship, steam as well as sail, 
means a man who has had sufficient experience in deck service to acquire the 
skill in seamanship needed to perform the duties, routine and emergency, re¬ 
quired in that service. Boatswains, quartermasters, etc., are simply able sea¬ 
men assigned to certain positions. 

The amount of gear and equipment used in the deck department on different 
classes of steamships varies greatly, of course, but it is a difference in degree, 
not in kind. The less gear and equipment the vessel may have, whatever her 
trade, the greater the skill needed in emergencies which no vessel can avoid. 
The deck crew of a steamer well supplied with rope and wire, lines and cables, 
booms, blocks and tackles, canvas, lumber, tools, and boats does not find it 
nearly so difficult to successfully meet emergencies as is the case on board a 
poorly equipped vessel. At the same time men can not learn a seaman’s duties 
as quickly on a poorly equipped vessel as he can on one that is well supplied 
with gear of various kinds. 

In reading the following partial description of a seaman’s work it should 
be borne in mind that a sailor works on all kinds of ships and does not confine 
himself, can not confine himself, to one kind of vessel in any one given trade. 
When out of employment he can not remain idle, waiting until he can ship 
on a particular kind of a steamer, rigged and equipped in a certain way, but 
he ships—hires out—on any kind of vessel he can get, and so, of necessity be¬ 
comes familiar with all classes of vessels, and must know his work in any or 
all of them. 

Mr. Scott. Let me. supplement that statement of Mr. Briggs’s, who 
diverted my question. 

Mr. O’Brien. I had not finished this. Now, here is what the work 
consists of: 

The rout'ne duties of the deck crew are so varied and the skill and knowl¬ 
edge required of able seamen is of such character as to be exceedingly difficult 
to describe. The following, however, will give some idea of the routine work 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 295 


on steamships, wliat the seaman (sailor) learns while engaged in it, and how 
it therefore fits him for the numerous emergencies he must meet. 

While on hoard ship in port the sailors are occupied mainly with preparing 
the vessel for sea. Much of the general work described herein is partially done 
while in port if there is sufficient time. The steering gear must be carefully 
overhauled, the wheel chains below decks taken down and, together with the 
wire rope, examined for needed repairs or substitution and set up again. 

Mr. Mills. You say the steering gear must be overhauled? 

Mr. O’Brien. The steering chains. 

Mr. Mills. Just what do you mean by steering chains? 

Mr. O’Brien. The ropes, wire, or chain that run from the wheel 
back to the rudder. 

If they do not take part in the handling of cargo they must, at least, take 
care of the gear used in that work, in moving the steamer from one part of the 
dock to another, running lines, changing berths at the same pier, breasting 
her into a dock or springing her out, using heavy mooring hawsers and cables, 
holding on or surging with turns of the hawser around t mber heads or bits— 

which I tried to explain yesterday. 

Mr. Gahn. Tell us how that applies to the Lakes. On most of the 
boats there are no such things on the Lakes; they usually have ma¬ 
chinery to do that on the Lakes. 

Mr. O’Brien. They have ropes when they have machinery, too. 

Mr. Gahn. Not on the large passenger boats ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; just the same. And the wires are more 
dangerous, in fact, than the ropes; because when you are handling 
a machine with the wire appliances then your skill must be acquired 
not only for the purpose of understanding the strength and amount 
of pressure the wire will bear, but also the amount of strain you are 
going to put on the engine which you are handling at the time. Con¬ 
tinuing from where I left off: 

* * * * or by compressor on a deck winch, putting the heaviest possible 

strain on the line without losing control by parting it. 

A good deal of the painting of hulls is done in port. This is done from light 
staging—a narrow plank with or without crosspieces—constructed by the 
sailors and slung over the side by means of light but strong ropes, with use 
of hitches which will not jam but which are safe. Sliding down the rope to 
the narrow plank, which may be swinging more or less, especially when working 
over the bow or under the overhang of the stern, they work anywhere from 
close to the water to 50 or 60 feet above it, climbing back on the deck, shifting 
the stage after every fleet, making fast to the rail here, a cleat there, a stan¬ 
chion there or any other safe and convenient holding place. An imperfect hitch 
or knot here means man overboard. 

That is, after you have a space painted, you have to fleet your 
staging, climbing back on the deck, and then slide down in order to 
paint again. 

While some of the crew is doing this, others are preparing gear and 
equipment, looking after the mooring lines, slacking off when too 
tight or heaving in when too slack; or if deck crew be small, one job 
is interrupted while more urgent ones are done. 

The cargo out, loading is begun. Gear may have to be shifted, the 
hold cleaned out, or the vessel may proceed to sea light or in ballast, 
taken on board by longshoremen or sailors, hoisted, or otherwise, 
unless water ballast is used. 

In many trades and ports, coastwise as well as foreign, the deck 
crews load and discharge cargoes. This consists in slinging it on the 
dock, hoisting it from the dock, and lowering it into the hold, or in 


296 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

trucking it over a gangplank through a side port into the hold, where 
it is stowed away so that it will not be damaged and the vessel will 
be in proper trim; even where stevedores are employed the mate is 
responsible for the proper stowing of cargo, and he usually details 
some able seaman to assist him in seeing that the work is properly 
done. Or the vessel may be in open ports, of which there are many, 
and passengers and cargo may be landed in lighters, boats, or by use 
of special boats called surfboats, carried especially for that purpose. 
The cargo may be anything from small package stuff, handled in 
net slings, to a piano or an automobile, costly glass or china ware. 
In weight it may be from a few pounds to 50 or more tons. It may 
be lumber to be hoisted on board in sling loads or shoved in by hand 
and stowed in the hold, or it may be bales of wool or cotton to be 
stowed, or grain, coal, or ore to be trimmed. 

Mr. Gahn. None of that hoisting hy the seamen is done on the 
Lakes, is it? 

Mr. O’Brien. Oh, yes; there is hoisting by the seamen on the 
Lakes. I have hoisted out many a cargo of railroad ties from the 
ship onto the dock, and that work is always done by the crew. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean to say the crew in loading lumber into 
ships would do that, especially the loading from the dock down into 
the hold? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. How long have they been doing it ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They have been doing it longer than I can remember. 

Mr. Scott. Is it not a fact they have an organization of the long¬ 
shoremen’s union and all the labor in connection with the loading of 
lumber is performed—both loading it from the (lock onto the ship 
and from the ship into the hold and locating the cargo—is performed 
and done under the supervision and management of the longshore¬ 
men’s union? 

Mr. O’Brien. No, sir. The longshoremen on the Lakes want to 
do that, but we have fought against it and held that work, although 
it means more work for our men. We have always done that work 
and helped in the loading; and in some instances, where there are no 
longshoremen at all, we do all the work, and especially in schooners 
we load the ship completely, and when they are short handed we 
unload the ship, too. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Who actually gives the able seaman his cer¬ 
tificate ? 

Mr. O’Brien. The United States Life-Saving Service, under the 
jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce. The statement was made 
that the able seaman’s certificate was issued by the seamen’s union. 
We have never had anything to do with the issuance of certificates 
whatever. 

Mr. Lazaro. You stated a while ago that you had asked for an 
examination to be given to the able seamen before a certificate was 
issued. 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Lazaro. You made that statement? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir; we tried to get it. 

Mr. Lazaro. What was the objection to that? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not tell you what the objection to that was, 
but Mr. Furuseth will be able to supply that. I was not at those 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 297 


hearings; but I know we were trying to get an examination, and 
the Congressmen came to the conclusion it would be better not to 
have that. 

Now, there is a considerable amount here on the qualifications of 
an able seaman. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you not just put that into the record? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. 

(The matter submitted for the record by Mr. O’Brien is as follows:) 

In any case, the stowing must be properly done or cargo will he damaged and 
vessels are likely to be lost. 

Ready for sea. an able seaman goes to the wheel. Lines are cast oil or 
anchor weighed, cargo ports, if any, closed either partially, as on a short trip 
in good weather, or made secure and water-tight for a longer voyage or in had 
weather. On passenger vessels the “emergency boats” are cleared away and 
swung out ready for instant use. Some passenger vessels send one man to the 
lookout in the bow, or the “ crow’s nest ” on the foremast, immediately upon 
leaving port; others not until sundown or foggy. Freight steamers never, 
unless foggy or during night. On passenger ships the officer of the watch (one 
of the mates) goes to the bridge and takes charge as soon as the master is 
ready to be relieved, which is usually as soon as the vessel is out of port. 
Another mate, or, if not, then some able seaman, selected for the purpose, 
supervises and assists in the work of clearing up the ship, lowering or topping 
and securing cargo booms, etc. Any stays or other rigging needing to be set 
up are attended to, hatches are battened down, i. e., made water-tight, or put 
in condition to be made water-tight quickly; heavy “strong backs” (handled 
by hand or purchase) have been placed under the hatch covers, wood or steel 
covers put on, and the tarpaulins (heavy canvas, soaked with tar) fastened on. 
There may be anywhere from 3 to 36 hatches to be battened down. 

On passenger vessels lower deck hatches may also be battened down, if there 
be men enough on board to attend to it. Usually there are not; it always ought 
to be done because of possible collision. 

Lines are coiled away, blocks, tackles, and guys used in connect on with the 
cargo booms are taken down, coiled up, and stored away; everything put into 
such shape as to permit all rope gear to dry thoroughly in preparations for 
overhauling and repair. Anchors are secured, fish tackle, if used, is unshipped 
and stored away, or canvas cover laced on to protect it from the weather. All 
hawse pipes, chocks, or other openings, leading into inclosed parts of the 
vessel are plugged or covered to keep seas from washing in. 

Watches are then set if the crew is divided into equal watches; few passen¬ 
ger vessels in the coastwise or lake trade do this, but it is generally done in the 
over-sea trade. 

In the general ocean trade, exclusive of large passenger vessels, each member 
of the deck crew, officers excepted, take a two-hour “ trick ” at the wheel and 
lookout, working around deck during the rest of their watch. 

Clean ship. Wash decks, the outside of all deck houses, etc., using hose and 
brooms, afterwards seeing that all gear is in order and espec'ally that rope gear 
is hung up; awnings and canvas weather cloths, when necessary, put up or 
taken down; fastenings and lacings are rope exclusively; care of these ropes, 
awnings, and weather cloths and their repair involves the same kind of work 
as is done on sails. 

One sailor sounds the pumps hourly or every watch, watching for leaks, 
sounds all ballast tanks to note the amount of water ship is making, so that she 
may be pumped out when necessary (there is no such thing as a perfectly 
water-tight ship). The steering engine must be examined and oiled each watch, 
and when not actually in the engine room this is done by one of the deck crew; 
in fog or rain all exposed gear, signal halyards, tackles, etc., must be slacked 
off when shrinking too tight and likely to be damaged under the strain, and 
as they slack up when air becomes dry must be tightened again. Other work 
being done, the deck crew begins the overhauling of all cargo gear, working- 
lines, cables, and hawsers for repairs. Stranded, chafed, or badly weakened 
parts are repaired by putting in a new strand, or the weakened part cut out 
entirely and the end put together again by a splice suitable for the line accord¬ 
ing to its use. New rope is uncoiled (a seemingly unimportant proceed'ng, but 
if'improperly done the rope will be damaged and some parts of it rendered 


298 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

nearly useless), measured off in lengths needed, new tackles rove off, new lines 
prepared, spliced into blocks, new pennants, whips, and slings made. Awnings, 
tarpaulins, boat covers, weather cloths, canvas caps and covers for ventilators 
repaired or new ones made. On longer voyages and in proprly manned vessels 
all these things are done on board by the deck crew. Extra lashings are pre¬ 
pared for various uses, rope swabs made, standing rigging oiled or tarred from 
time to time, and numerous things of the same nature attended to. In a greater 
or less degree this work goes on in all classes of ships. 

The man who expects to he known as an able seaman on a steamship must 
know the use of rigging screws, fids, marlin spikes, serving mallets, the palm 
and needle, calking tools, and most of the carpenter tools, the mixing of paints 
and colors; how to obtain strong leverages with bars, ropes, tackles; how to 
brace with wedges and shores, besides knowing the various knots and splices, 
and to worm, parcel, serve, and seize, with rope and wire, and must be able 
to hold up his end of a job when it comes to climbing and working in places 
where both arm hold and foothold is difficult. He must know the lead line, not 
only its marks, but how to use it to get correct sounding when the ship is in 
close quarters, the night dark, and the sea heavy, whether he stands in a 
smother of sea on a low freighter or far up the side of an immense liner. The 
compass, of course, is a familiar object to him, but he must know how to 
use it, how to steer the ship under all conditions, what to expect and how to 
meet it when he is steering across a current as well as with it or against it, 
through the swift rush of a narrows, passing at close quarters in and out of 
the suction of another heavy ship under speed, with the wind light or strong 
from any direction, heading into a heavy sea, taking in on either bow or quarter 
or abeam, under check or full speed, rolling and pitching heavily, or running 
before it, when a blunder may mean total loss of ship with lives and cargo. 
The man at the wheel must know his work, what to expect and how to meet it 
instantly, in calm or storm, daylight or dark, in clear weather or in fog. The 
man who learns to be a reasonably good helmsman in even three years is an 
exception, because, regardless of the aptitude of the individual, the personal 
knowledge of varying conditions, different ships, how they act under differing 
circumstances and familiarity with the various steering gears, can only be 
gained through experience necessarily covering a good deal of time. The steam 
steering gear, rendering less phyical strength necessary and making possible 
the handling of larger ships, requires greater skill than the old hand method 
which permitted the man at the wheel to feel the increasing or decreasing 
rudder pressure and thus warn him of just how the ship was acting. 

If you would be recognized as an able seaman on a sailing vessel, you must 
know and be able to perform the work above indicated, and in addition you 
must know and know the use of every part of the standing and running rigging 
of such vessel. You must know how to repair it, how to make new parts of 
the standing rigging, and how to place it on the masthead; you must know 
the running rigging well enough to find any rope in the darkest night and how 
to use it; you must know how to send down and send up spars, how to rig jury 
masts, jury rigging and jury rudder in case of necessity. You must know how r 
to handle sail in all kinds of weather—how to take them in, how to reef them, 
how to furl them, how to cast them loose, how to stick out reefs, and how to 
set them. To know this it not enough; you must be able to do it in all kinds of 
weather, when it can be done, in the darkest night as well as in the light of day. 
You must be well enough inured to the sea to have your body at all times accom¬ 
modate itself to the movements of the vessel and to do so unconsciously. Your 
mind and body must have been so developed by experience and contact with 
the sea that you have the coolness and resourcefulness needed to meet and 
overcome difficulties and emergencies. But these last are the necessary qualities 
of all seamen. They are needed on a steamer as well as on a sailing vessel. To 
quote from Bullen’s Men of the Merchant Service, page 256: 

“An able seaman, properly so called, is a skilled mechanic with great ability. 
On sailing vessels his place in calm or storm never can be adequately filled by 
the unskilled, however numerous, nor in steamships in emergencies.” 

However, even that which is considered the merest routine work requires 
considerable training and presupposes physical ability not common. 

Painting, scrubbing, etc .—Prepared paint is seldom brought on board ship. 
The raw material is put on board and is mixed according to needs by the able 
seaman. Graining, filling, varnishing, and lettering is done as well as ordinary 
flat painting. Sailors become sufficiently skilled at this work to qualify as 
journeymen painters on shore. The deck crew cleans all outside parts of the 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 299 


ship, except the funnel, from the mast and booms to the deck houses, decks, 
and sides of the ship. Some of this work must be described to show that there 
is more practice in it than simply scrubbing and painting. 

Scrubbing and painting lifeboats. —Usually painted white. Covers removed 
and all gear taken from the boats; inside cleaned; boat lashings let go, boats 
hoisted clear of the chocks; outside cleaned; boats lowered in place, gear the 
lashings replaced. When painting the same process is repeated. 

Scrubbing and painting of masts. —Gantlines must be rove either through 
sheaves just below the eyes of the backstays (near extreme top) or through 
block carried aloft for that purpose. The sailor goes up the ratlines to the 
eyes of the lower rigging; from there he “ shins ” up the topmast to the eyes 
of the upper rigging, where he hangs on as best he can while some one on 
deck bends the gantline onto the signal halyards and hoists it to the man aloft, 
who reeves the gantline through the sheave, unbends the halyards, slides down 
the mast to the eyes of the lower rigging, bringing the ends of the gantline 
and the signal halyards with him; thence to the deck. If no signal halyards, 
such halyards are usually rove off first, to be used in hoisting up the gantline. 
If no ratlines on the lower rigging, he must “ shin ” all the way up the 
shrouds of the lower mast and then up the topmast. When the gantline is rove 
it is bent onto a “boatswain’s chair” (a short piece of board slung in a rope 
strap) and the sailor is hoisted back aloft. Reaching the highest point to 
which the “chair” can carry him, he is anywhere from 10 to 15 feet below 
the truck or extreme top of the mast. Fie gets out of the “boatswain’s chair” 
and “ shins ” the bare pole to the very top, sometimes using a rope strap. 
Scrubbing materials are sent up to him on the signal halyards, and hanging 
onto the bare pole he works down in that manner until he gets low enough to 
swing himself into the “ chair ” again; after which he works down, lowering 
himself as needed by slacking away on the gantline, which he makes fast to the 
“ boatswain’s chair.” Reaching the deck, he is hoisted aloft again and then goes 
through the same performance in painting, which may include gilding or paint¬ 
ing the ball on top of the mast. Anywhere from one to three men work 
each mast. Where three men work, one takes the topmast, the other two the 
lower mast. 

Ship’s work of the nature described above continues unceasingly until bad 
weather sets in and heavy sea rises. Everything movable on deck must then 
be securely lashed, extra lashings are put on the more exposed lifeboats, some of 
the ventilator tops exposed to the wash of the sea are unshipped, canvas cover¬ 
ings lashed over openings, parts of hatchings left open for ventilation are closed 
and battened down, and as needed life lines are stretched along exposed sections 
of the deck. During the gale the watch on deck and sometimes the whole deck 
crew is constantly at work. Anything may break adrift, from a piano in the 
cabin in a passenger ship to a heavy cargo boom on deck, from paint pots in 
the forepeak to a spare anchor on the forecastle, from some cargo below decks or 
on deck to a lifeboat on the gallows; the deck crew must secure it whatever it 
is and put on the necessary lashings. A deadlight is smashed in, a hatch cover 
loosened, part of a rail broken, a ventilator cap torn oft, a companion ladder 
getting shaky, a cargo port weakened and leaky; the able seamen must do what¬ 
ever necessary to remedy the damage. No matter what kind of ship, no matter 
the trade, when the gale is on the deck crew finds no time for anything except 
to perform work immediately necessary for the safety of the ship and its equip¬ 
ment, aside from being prepared to meet the many grave emergencies that may 
arise. On such occasions they work often without any rest until so exhausted 
that they are absolutely unable to do any more. 

The weather moderating, unusual lashings put on boats are removed, life 
lines taken down, parts of hatches reopened, ventilators reshipped, and in event 
any damage done it is repaired as far as possible at sea. In all this, excepting 
oniy in connection with the engine and boiler rooms, and sometimes even there, 
the* deck crews, working under supervision of the deck officers, are called upon. 

Routine work is resumed and continued. When no other work is immediately 
necessary some interior chipping of rust, scraping, and painting may be done 
inside or outside the hull, the towing hawser or anchor chains are overhauled 
and restored. Damaged rigging or damaged service on shrouds may have to be 
repaired, ratlines may have to be replaced, if of rope seized with marlin; if 
iron rods, with wire seizing; canvas covering used on some parts of the deck and 
on top of the deck houses may be ripped off and new stuff laid; life preservers 
overhauled and repaired; the ship’s colors, signal flags, etc., kept in good condi¬ 
tion. The work is never completed, because there are not men enough in the 


300 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


deck crew, and some of it is done in sail lofts and by “ harbor seamen ” when the 
vessel is in port. 

Nearing port, preparations are made for landing of passengers and discharging 
of cargo. Necessary gear is made ready, anchors ready, hatches unbattened, etc. 
The vessel may go to a dock in convoy of tugs, as in *tke-case of a big liner, or 
may work her way in alone close enough for one of the sailors to slide down a 
rope and swing himself into the dock to take a line; or she may come to anchor 
in some harbor, a roadstead, or off the open beach, as the case may be. Pas¬ 
sengers may be landed over gangplanks, cargo discharged by longshore gangs, 
or, if in bulk, scooped out by powerful machinery in ports where traffic is regular 
and heavy and the docks arranged for the purpose; or the cargo may be handled 
by the deck crew, as in some trades like that of the Pacific, some of the bay and 
sound steamers of the Atlantic, or the combination passenger and merchandise 
steamers of the Great Lakes; or, as in many parts of the world, passengers and 
cargo may have to be landed in boats manned by the deck crew, sometimes 
through heavy surf. 

All vessels, steam or sail, carry lifeboats. One on a small sailing hooker, 2 to 4 
on freight steamers, up to 30 or more on large passenger ships. The handling of 
boats in all cases, except at drills and when all boats must be used at the same 
time, is done almost exclusively by the deck crew. 

The smaller class of vessels of all kinds lower a boat for general working 
purposes at every anchorage or port to communicate with shore, to run lines, 
etc., and man it by members of the deck crew. In all trades passenger steamers 
carry a working boat, handled by the deck crew, for general service in connection 
with ship’s work. 

The emergency boats, which are kept ready for instant lowering on passenger 
sli'ps, are manned exclusively by members of the deck crew. 

In rescue work at sea boats are manned entirely by able seamen if a sufficient 
number of such are on board. If able seamen are insufficient in number, the 
less experienced men in the deck crew fill out the boat crews, and when that is 
insufficient men from the other departments are necessarily used. The differ¬ 
ence between the exhibition known as boat drill and actual service conditions 
and practice will be described later. 

SOME EMERGENCIES. 

Fire .—In event of actual fire the official fire alarm used on passenger steamers 
in fire drill is promptly dispensed with. The bridge or pilot-house and engine 
room is notified. Fire on deck or in the cargo is handled by the deck crew, get¬ 
ting help when needed from the engine department. When the fire is in the pas¬ 
senger quarters (the steward’s department) the deck officer who responds with 
Ids crew of sailors takes immediate charge, his crew being assisted by the 
steward’s men if necessary; when the fire is in the engine or boiler room or coal 
bunkers the deck officer with his crew promptly gets to the spot, but here the 
deck officer does not take charge as quickly, the engineer’s staff usually being 
the best fire fighters for that part of the ship. 

Stranding .—When vessel runs ashore and the immediate assistance of tugs 
or other vessels is not to be obtained, the ship must be lightened and worked 
off in some manner. For this purpose cargo and other heavy materal may be 
transferred from one part of the ship to another or may be thrown overboard. 
Among other things to be done may be the carrying out of an anchor to help pull 
the ship off. If the kedge anchor will not hold, one of the large anchors, regard¬ 
less of size or weight, must be taken out and dropped some distance from the 
vessel with a heavy hawser attached. This is done by the deck crew; two or 
four lifeboats may be lashed together, a heavy boom or spar lashed across, the 
anchor suspended from the spar under the boats, the hawser lightered by other 
boats if necessary. The anchor is taken to the desired distance, the hawser 
thrown off the boats sustaining it, and the anchor dropped by cutting the lashings 
holding it to the spar, whereupon the winches, capstans, or windlass may be used, 
putting the greatest possible strain upon the cable while the engines are backing 
or going ahead full speed. If another vessel appears to offer help, lines must be 
run between the vessels, and again the deck crew does the work, using the boats. 

Wheel chains parting or tiller quadrant breaking; relieving tackle are hooked 
on, the steering is done “pulley haul ” while repairs are made; in bad weather 
(the only time it happens at sea) this is always a difficult and dangerous job, 
requiring skill in every man assisting. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 301 


Collisions. The damage must be ascertained, leaks stopped, and sinking pre¬ 
vented, or at least delayed, if possible. In this many things may be done, from 
dragging a sail or tarpaulin over outside of the injured spot to shoring down 
a lower deck opening over the damaged compartment to hold the pressure, 
shoring and bracing strained bulkheads, and, of course, clearing away boats 
ready to receive passengers, etc. 

Loss of rudder .—Sails to be set for the purpose of steadying the vessel (most 
steamers carry sails on board ready to be bent on), a sea anchor, sometimes 
made in a hurry, used it necessary, while a jury rudder or some other con¬ 
trivance for steering the vessel is rigged up. 

Engines disabled .—The deck crew, with sail and sea anchor, must find some 
way to steady the ship and keep her out of the trough of the sea while repairs 
are being made. 

Wireless gear aloft carried away .—It is the able seaman who goes aloft to 
repair the damage and the deck officer who directs the work. 

BOAT DRILL VERSUS ACTUAL SERVICE. 

Held weekly; first the signal for “ fire drill ” is given, calling the various 
members of the crew to their stations, lines of fire hose are pulled down, and 
perhaps some of the valves are opened. Immediately after this comes the signal 
for “ boat drill,” for which the crew is now waiting. They go to the boats to 
which they are assigned. In the assignment to boat stations the deck crew 
is divided between the various crews in such a way that one man from that 
part of the ship’s crew will be in each boat, as far as their number will permit. 
In many instances, especially in steamers in the coasting, Great Lakes, and 
bay and sound steamers, the deck crew goes to the boats in advance and pre¬ 
pares them for the drill by letting go lashings, clearing away tackles, etc. The 
entire crew then proceeds to “drill,” covers are pulled off (not always), boats 
hoisted from the chocks and swung out ready for lowering. In some cases the 
boat’s painter is passed out and plugs put in place. The boats may or may 
not be lowered into the water. In event any of the boats are lowered, the job 
consists of simply lowering the lifeboat into the smooth water of the harbor. 
Oars are gotten out and some pulling is done. Boats are then hoisted up and 
placed in the chocks, after which the deck crew completes the job of straight¬ 
ening out the gear, releasing the boats, etc. 

A ship in distress is sighted; passengers and crew need to be transferred. 
Five or six of the lifeboats are ordered away for this work. Be the weather 
good or bad, all boat-drill arrangement is dispensed with. The boats are 
cleared away and manned, not by their boat-drill crew but by members of the 
deck crews, as far as the deck crew is sufficient in number to man such boats. 
In any event every important position in such boats is filled by able seamen 
or men of higher rating from the deck department. At the steering oar. 
the stroke oar, and the bow oar are able seamen; and if the weather be very 
bad no more boats are lowered than can be manned with a majority of able 
seamen in each boat, and especially in all important positions. In a seaway 
with the ship rolling a boat must be lowered so as to avoid too great a swing 
and gotten away from the ship’s side as soon as it is water borne, otherwise 
it will be stove in by smashing against the ship’s side, swamped, or capsized. 
The boats are lowered one at a time, bumpers or cushions of sails or mat¬ 
tresses may be hung over the side, a bridle passed around the falls to check 
the outward swing, a line made fast to the lowest point that can be reached 
on the ship’s side is passed into the boat, where it is used to check the out¬ 
ward swing, while others of the crew guard against the heavy inward 
swing with their oars laid so as to catch the force of the blow without breaking 
the oars. A sea painter is used, leading from well forward on the ship and 
into the boat, where, unlike the ordinary painter, it is not made fast, but is 
held by one man with one or more turns around the thwarth to help keep her 
parallel with the vessel until it is time to let go, when it is used to shear the 
boat off from the vessel’s side sufficiently to make possible the use of the 
oars. Perhaps the safety of the boat depends more upon this one man than 
upon any other that is in the boat until she is perfectly clear. The lowering 
of the boat must be done so as to keep her on even keel, and the two men 
lowering away at the tackles must work well together and understand their 
job, to which a knowledge of the sea is essential, or the boat may come down 
end on and spill the occupants out, or may be swamped even before the tackles 


302 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


are unhooked. One at a time the boats are thus sent away. As they return 
with their loads the people must be hauled on board, boats hoisted, and in this 
nothing is done as in boat drill. 

A technical description might be attempted, but would not be generally true, 
because things to be done, and sometimes, even more important, left undone, 
are as changeable as the ever-changing sea: nothing but the experience and 
skill coupled with the mental attitude acquired as the result of a seaman’s 
daily work at sea can give to any person the qualities that go toward making 
rescue work at sea effective. On a steamer this can only be obtained in 
the deck department. The other departments require a high degree of skill, 
but it is of a different kind, acquired under different conditions, and for differ¬ 
ent purposes. 

Perhaps the best description of the able seaman was by the master who said: 

“ Joe has been with me for two years. I have never seen him appear to be 
wet or cold nor to be stumped by any work that came his way on board the 
vessel.” 

He must, indeed, be able to do any work that comes to him or to which he 
is placed, or he will, at the discretion of the master, be reduced in rating and 
wages, as provided in section 4612 of the Revised Statutes of the United States 
and by the maritime laws of all nations. 

Up to the time when insurance had been so developed as to remove risks 
from the owner of a ship, and the responsibility to the traveler and shipper had 
been minimized and practically wiped away by a limitation of shipowner’s 
liability, the shipowner insisted that four years of experience was little enough 
time to fit a man to take care of his property at sea, and so he insisted when 
appealing to legislators or by attorneys pleading to a court; he talks differently 
now. 

Mr. Briggs. I would like to ask you one other question, not on 
that particular line. Mr. O’Brien, do you know of your own knowl¬ 
edge just why these small boats, or the boats that carry package 
freight, have failed to succeed on the Lakes in the last few years? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know why they have not succeeded. But 
I know that in 1919 the concensus of opinion of the vessel owners 
was that they had an exceptionally good year. 

Mr. Briggs. How many boats were idle on the Lakes then; do you 
recall what percentage of them were idle ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Since the passage of the seamen’s act? 

Mr. Briggs. Say last year, for instance. 

Mr. O’Brien. 1 do not know whether any boats were idle with 
the exception of the Kirby, and I have been told the reason the Kirby 
did not run was—I am telling this from hearsay. 

Mr. Briggs I would not state that, then. 

Mr. O’Brien. It can be found out from the Inspection Service, 
whether it is true or not. It was because there were defects in the 
boiler of the ship itself, and the Inspection Service would not allow 
her to run. 

Mr. Briggs. How has cargo kept up on the Lakes in the last few 
years? Has it kept up pretty well, or fallen off? 

Mr. O’Brien. The rates for carrying cargo were extremelv high 
during the last few years. The competition for bottoms, for vessels, 
was so keen that the rates were enormous. 

Mr. Briggs. Were all the bottoms used? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes, sir. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to 
say I have been sent here by the men who sail on the ships, whose 
lives are going to be placed in jeopardy by the employment of un¬ 
skilled men, the men who will have to work with those unskilled 
men and depend upon them for lowering them and for the safety of 
their lives. That is in that proviso where it states that certificated' 
lifeboat men have to be employed in lieu of able seamen. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 303 

Mr. Gahn. May be, it says. 

Mr. O’Brien. Slay be employed. 

(The committee thereupon took a recess until 2 o’clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. 

The committee reconvened, pursuant to recess, at 2.30 o’clock 
p. m., Hon. William S. Greene (chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF MU. THOMAS CONWAY, OF BUFFALO, N. Y., REP¬ 
RESENTING THE MARINE FIREMEN, OILERS, WATER TENDERS, 

AND COAL PASSERS’ UNION. 

Mr. Briggs. You have an official position? 

Mr. Conway. I am general secretary of the Marine Firemen, 
Oilers, Water Tenders, and Coal Passers’ Union. 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, there has been a 
lot of things injected into this hearing. You have been told a lot 
of things that really this law will not cure or remedy and that it does 
not affect. 

The Chairman. I would like to have this gentleman give his testi¬ 
mony and the committee to make notes in order to make inquiries 
after he concludes, rather than interfere with the witness when he is 
talking because it takes up a great deal of time and arouses discus¬ 
sions that are entirely unnecessary, and, to my mind, do not do 
any good on the bill. It only makes trouble for us and we have a 
lot of work to do and have other bills we must hear, and we can not 
devote all of the time to this bill. 

Mr. Hardy. I think that is a wise suggestion. 

Mr. Briggs. I think that is a good one. 

The Chairman. I do not want to stop discussion or prevent any¬ 
body getting all the light they want. If anybody from the outside 
wants to ask questions I shall have to ask him to wait until the wit¬ 
ness concludes. 

Mr. Conway. The statement has been made or you have been told 
that the seamen’s law has made the unions on the Lakes. I want to 
call to the attention of the committee that the Firemen, Oilers, and 
Water Tenders’ Union has been in existence since 1888, and all boats 
that this bill affects have for 20 years, to my knowledge—that is, a 
vast majority of those boats have—employed members of our organi¬ 
zation, therefore, the seamen’s law is not responsible for the employ¬ 
ment of the members of our organization. Now, Capt. Crosby stated 
cause the seamen’s law only puts the firemen on three watches. The 
seamen’s law could possibly only increase that vessel one man, be¬ 
cause the seamen’s law only puts" the firemen on three watches. The 
boat formerly employed two watches, and as far as the seamen’s law 
is concerned it only increased the crew one. It is true that the crew 
was increase three, but the Steamboat-Inspection Service are the ones 
that increased it by putting coal passers on there. The section of 
the law which say that men shall not be employed in the fireroom and 
on deck, or on deck and in the fireroom, the question of whether the 
boats shall employ coal passers is left to the discretion of the steam¬ 
boat inspector, and there is no section of the seamen’s law which 
savs that that boat shall or shall not carry or employ coal passers, 


304 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

but after investigation on the part of the steamboat inspector, the 
United States steamboat inspector, and he finds that for the safe 
navigation of the vessel it is necessary. for the boat to employ coal 
passers, he puts on coal passers and not the seamen’s law. 

As far as the cook that was put on his vessel and concerning the 
claim that was put on by the seamen’s law, there is no section of the 
seamen’s law that deals with cooks. It is true that the second cook 
was put on his boat, but that was long after the passage of the sea¬ 
men’s law. The second cook was put on by the Shipping Board; the 
United States Shipping Board put the second cook on, not the sea¬ 
men’s law. So far as Capt. Crosby’s boat is concerned, the seamen’s 
law put one extra man on the vessel and that man was a fireman. 

The two D. & C. boats that are laid up that we have been told are 
not going to run to Alpena this year, in so far as section 2 of the 
seamen’s law is concerned, those boats have always carried three 
watches of firemen and it was so testified to by Capt. Simpson, repre¬ 
senting that company. So the seamen’s law put no extra firemen on 
either one of those boats, but the seamen’s law did put an extra oiler 
and extra water tender on there. That is as much as section 2 of the 
seamen’ law did. It put two extra men on the Alpena and two on 
that other one, of which I forget the name. As far as Mr. Davidson’s 
boat is concerned the steamer Sacramento was not increased one by 
the seamen’s law for the reason that the steamer Sacramento carried 
three firemen before the passage of the seamen’s law; therefore, if she 
carries coal passers the coal passers are put on there by the steam¬ 
boat inspectors and not by the seamen’s law. The seamen’s law does 
not say, and I have it here, that one coal passer shall be employed or 
ten. It says nothing whatsoever about the employment of coal 
passers. 

If the United States steamboat inspector, after due investigation— 
and, gentlemen, let me call your attention to that—the steamboat in¬ 
spector does not investigate with the crew; he does not come to the 
unions either to ask or find out any information. He goes aboard the 
boat and finds it out of condition. Those are practical men that are 
employed as United States steamboat inspectors to investigate, and 
if they find that the condition is such that for the safe navigation of 
the vessel it is necessary for the vessel to employ coal passers they put 
them on and they specify the number, not the seamen’s law. 

As far as the package-freight business is concerned, gentlemen, at 
Buffalo, the Great Lakes Transit Corporation, of which Mr. David¬ 
son, who testified here, is now on the board of directors, have, I think, 
approximately 22 vessels. There is not one pound of ice with the 
exception of some small amount of ice in Lake Superior, and up until 
last Saturday there have been only three of those boats left Buffalo, 
and it is not because of the seamen’s law.that they are not running, but 
it is because of the lack of business; not the seamen’s law. They can 
not get loads. To-day at Buffalo—there was when I left—at least, in 
the city of Buffalo, right in that harbor alone, 37 vessels loaded with 
coal, not taking it up the lake, but loaded with coal; had their crews 
there inspected, and they were tied up to a brick wall because they 
could not get loads to come down. It is not the seamen’s law that is 
doing it, though. 

Now, I want to tell you that section 2 of this bill, providing “ that 
in all merchant vessels of the United States of more than 100 tons 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 305 


gross, where the continuous run is 16 hours or more, excepting those 
navigating rivers, harbors, bays, or sounds exclusively, the sailors, 
oilers, and water tenders shall, while at sea, be divided at least into 
two watches,” not only covers the Lakes but it covers the ocean. It 
covers the Pacific coast; it covers the Atlantic coast, and it puts the 
oilers and the water tenders back on the two-watch system. It does 
not only apply to the Lakes; it applies to the whole United States 
and every vessel running under the American flag. The oilers and 
water tenders on the coast have had three watches for years and 
years and years, and this bill is going to put them back on two 
watches. 

You have heard a lot of testimony about the two watch or three 
watch for firemen on boats on short runs being unreasonable and 
unfair. I just want to call your attention to one line of boats, two 
vessels that have only a 55-mile run, the Americana and the Cano- 
diana. Those boats go from BufFalo to Crystal Beach; from Crystal 
Beach back to BufFalo. They have three watches of firemen, and 
those firemen are kept busy all the time. The boat discontinues run¬ 
ning at midnight, or shortly after midnight, but a vessel is not a 
horse or it is not an automobile. A vessel has got to be prepared 
and the vessel has got to be kept in condition and Capt. Simpson 
very frankly stated here to this committee that because a boat was 
at the dock was no reason that the crew was not employed. He very 
frankly stated that, and Capt. Simpson told the facts. It is true that 
the men have work to do every minute that they are there. This bill, 
if adopted by the Congress of the United States, means 84 hours per 
week for the firemen working in a temperature running anywhere 
from 115 to 140°. That is what this bill means—84 hours per week. 
Gentlemen, we work 56 hours a week now. The men in all the basic 
industries of the United States work 48. 

We are not here asking you to reduce us down to 48, but we are 
here asking you to let us have what we have now, a 56-hour week, 
and when you stop to consider the conditions under which we work 
in the fireroom, as I said, in heat from 115 up to 140°, which was 
testified to in hearings past, when the law was adopted. I, myself, 
testified to putting a thermometer on my breast at a vessel at the 
dock at the lower lifeboat, that the vessel was 115°, and with that 
condition the boilers furnished just sufficient steam to run the aux¬ 
iliary machinery. They talk about the shoveling of 2,800 pounds 
of coal in an hour. The shoveling of 2,800 pounds of coal is not 
a very hard job, but burning 2,800 pounds of coal is a clifFerert 
proposition altogether. You have got to keep your fire in condition. 
You have always got to keep it going, because the steamers only 
carry sufficient boiler capacity. You have got to get practically 
100 per cent of what they are capable of getting, because if they 
carried more boiler capacity it would take up either crew or cargo 
space, and, therefore, they just carry sufficient boiler power to run 
the boats, and no more. *If a boat does lay at the dock for a few 
hours, there are fires to clean, flues to blow, or repairs in the fireroom, 
keeping up the fireroom and one hundred and one other things that 
the firemen have to do. They say the seamen’s law gave the three 
watches to the firemen. It did on some boats, but the steamboat in¬ 
spectors gave it on the other boats. 

48420—21-20 


306 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14' OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

I do not think we are unreasonable or unfair when we say to this 
committee and to Congress: Leave us the 56-hour week. Do not 
put us back on the 84-hour week. Some may say that it does not 
put you back, but it may put you back. The peculiar part of it is 
that the steamboat owners have at all times applied the ertreme pen¬ 
alty of the law where they could; every time. They do not let up 
on the law; they apply that extreme penalty, and the extreme penalty 
of this proposed law is 84 hours per week, and the printers are ask¬ 
ing now for a 44-hour week. I am not here asking you to reduce 
our hours; we are asking you to allow us to continue to work 56 
hours. We work there in the heat and hours overtime, and there is 
not a boat but what there was a man testified here to, with the excep¬ 
tion of Mr. Crosby, that he got any overtime for Sunday, and there 
is no passenger boat in the business on the Lakes that we get over¬ 
time pay on Sunday, and we are such a wonderful, strong organiza¬ 
tion and so powerful that at the peak of the wages, when everybody 
at shore was getting $5, $6, and $7 and $8 a day, we were getting 
from our employers the extreme limit of $130 a month, and on those 
ocean boats we got $125 a month to bring home to our wife and chil¬ 
dren to live on. Then they will try to tell you that we are gentle¬ 
men with horns at $125 a month during the war with war-time prices 
and have my wife and children and the wife and children of the 
firemen on the Lakes live on it. 

If that is unreasonable, if that was an unreasonable wage, I do not 
know how to be reasonable. Those gentlemen come here and tell you 
that there is practically a conspiracy; that the seamen’s law has 
brought about a conspiracy between the engineers, masters, mates, 
and pilots and the three other organizations. Let me honestly and 
frankly say to you that I am an executive officer of the Firemen’s 
Union, in closer touch, meeting with the representatives of the engi¬ 
neers in my daily work, going to lunch and coming back from lunch, 
and before my God I have never in my time been told by the engi¬ 
neers what they were going to ask from employers after or before 
they had asked it and after they had asked it. They blame the 
10 months’ contract on to the seamen’s law. I defy any vessel owner 
on the Lakes or any place else to say that I have met him in con¬ 
junction with the engineers, or masters, or mates, or pilots to make 
any contract; and as far as pulling off the men is concerned, if that 
means the pilots or engineers, let me say this to you, that there was 
a time when the masters, mates, and pilots had a dispute with Mr. 
Shonts, of the Detroit & Cleveland Transportation Co., the biggest 
passenger line on the Great Lakes, and certain claims were made, and 
I answered Mr. Shonts, and I will file, if I may be allowed, later on 
a letter that I received back from Mr. Shonts on the stand and posi¬ 
tion I took in the discussion and disturbances, whatever you may 
call it. 

We met last spring, everything as peaceful as it is here. We all 
shook hands at the end. Everybody was satisfied, and we got a very, 
very poor bargain, because the lake carriers paid $5 in all cases more 
than we received in the contract, and although, gentlemen, we were 
accused at that time that if the lake carriers paid more money than 
our contract called for that we would demand from the passenger- 
boat owners the equal pay of that paid by the Lake Carriers’ Asso- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2> 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 307 

ciation, and in reply I said, “ Gentlemen, please do not accuse us of 
a crime before we commit it. Give us the opportunity and, by God, 
accuse us after we have committed it.” And I defy them or any¬ 
body else to say that, although we have received anywhere from 
$5 to $15 per month less, that we asked them to meet that higher 
scale. We never went near them, and carried out our contract in 
its entiret} T . There is another thing here. In all those contracts 
there are two parties to the contract, and not only one side. The 
vessel owners are human, too, and they sometimes sin as well as 
others. As far as firing a steamboat is concerned, firing and shovel¬ 
ing coal under any conditions is not play work. Shoveling coal un¬ 
der the conditions that we have to meet in the fireroom is extremely 
hard work, and as proof conclusive of that you can consider the 
clothes that a man wears when he goes down in the firerooms. You 
do not see him with an overcoat and coat and vest. He goes down 
there with overalls, woolen shirt and jumper, and when he is down 
takes his jumper off and works in his undershirt; and there is gas 
from those furnaces, as most of those have forced gas draft furnaces. 
I have in my day seen men hoisted right out of the fireroom, and it 
was not because, as some will say, that they were drunk either, be¬ 
cause I fired for a good many years, and I do not know the taste of 
liquor. 

I am willing to answer any question that may be propounded to 
me on section 2 of this bill. I am not an authority as a sailor and 
do not know anything about a sailor. I am simply a fireman and 
have done nothing else outside of representing that organization. 
That I do all my life time. 

Mr. Briggs. Under the ruling of the chairman, I think you may 
conclude your remarks. 

Mr. Conway. That concludes my remarks, and I will be glad to 
answer any questions. 

Mr. Gahn. You spoke about the firemens’ work while the ship 
was in port. Is there any difference between the character and 
severity of his work at that time than when the ship is at sea? 

Mr. Conway. The severity of the work is in some degree different. 

Mr. Gahn. Explain what that difference is. 

Mr. Conway. All the vessels that this bill will affect it affects 
with equal force in port. Take for instance, the longest run that 
I know of, which I think is the Detroit and Buffalo run, approxi¬ 
mately 15 hours. As that boat gets into Buffalo about 9 o’clock, 
Buffalo time, the men on watch clean a certain number of fires. 
Cleaning a fire is this. Take a great big slice bar weighing from 35 
to 40 pounds and perhaps a little heavier, and you open up the 
furnace door and shove the good fire to one side of the furnace. 
You then take a big hoe weighing from 30 to 35 pounds, and pull 
the clinkers and dirt out of it off on one side. You then wing your 
fire back with your slice bar and you pull out your dirt and clinkers 
from the other side, then you spread your fire and then you have 
your ashes to handle. That is only one fire. A man can clean a fire, 
and clean it right, in about 35 or 40 minutes if there are not clinkers. 
You know coal runs and sometimes I have had to use water in fires, 
shove it to one side, and the clinkers were so bad, sticking to the 
grates, that I could not get the slice bar under them, but I took a 


308 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

pail of water and threw it in to break the clinkers up. Then you 
have got the flues to blow. There is nobody employed aboard a 
freight boat that there is no work for. It is hard for me to come 
here and tell you every movement of a fireman. 

Mr. Gahn. I did not want that, but as a matter of fact is the fire¬ 
man’s work considered lighter in port than at sea ? 

Mr. Conway. You do not have to shovel so much coal. 

Mr. Gahn. Is it lighter work? 

Mr. Conway. There is much more gas. 

Mr. Gahn. What do you mean by gas? 

Mr. Chindblom. It is easier work. 

Mr. Conway. I do not think it is much easier in port on these 
boats. The fact is that on one boat one company voluntarily with¬ 
out request from the seamen put three extra men on board, and there 
is a man sitting in this room whose boat carries more men than he is 
required to carry. 

Mr. Gahn. Do the men work their full time on shore just as at 
sea? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely. 

Mr. Gahn. Without exception? 

Mr. Conway. Without exception. 

Mr. Edmonds. Is that while you are at the wharf or while load¬ 
ing it at night? 

Mr. Conway. You have got to keep steam always, the auxiliary 
machinery uses steam. 

Mr. Edmonds. You are using forced draft? 

Mr. Conway. No; a man to open your doors, the forced draft not 
being there, you are getting more draft than if there was a draft 
there to take the smoke up, because the flues with the forced-draft 
boats have retorts, and the draft is not there. 

Mr. Edmonds. Did you have coal passers on the lake on some of 
the smaller steamers before the La Eollette bill? 

Mr. Conway. You had combination coal passer and deck hand. 

Mr. Edmonds. The coal passer is a new employee since this act 
went into effect? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; when the conditions were shown to the com¬ 
mittees, I think that they were so shocked that there was not one 
objected to that section. 

There was not one objection to that section. To give you proof 
we had a man in the fireroom where it was 115° to 130° up in zero 
weather when it was freezing on deck, and showed them the boats 
where the ice was on and the men had to go and handle the line out 
of the fireroom, and prove that the percentage of sickness Avas 
greater in 8 months than it was in 12 months on either one of the 
coasts; that Avas the only spot that I have ever heard of in the 
whole Avorld where they employed a man in the fireroom and then 
employed him on deck, too, the only place in the Avorld. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that unusual hazard in the fireroom? Was that 
the reason why more Avatches were required, three instead of tAvo ? 

Mr. Conavay. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you go into the testimony, you and others here, 
with reference to the extra hazard of the work in the fireroom and 
going back on the deck ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 309 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. All that was gone over week after week and month 
after month when this bill was passed? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. I did not even hear a vessel owner object 
to it in the hearings. 

Mr. Edmonds. Let me ask you in regard to the firemen: A boat 
goes out with two or three firemen in the daytime. That is neces- 
sary, but the boat gets in and lays up all night. T)o you have three 
firemen on all night? 

Mr. Conway. I do not know of any boat that does that. 

Mr. Edmonds. Are not some of these boats laid up for the day 
when they come into port on the regular runs ? 

Mr. Conway. Mr. Newman’s boat leaves Cleveland at 9 o’clock 
and gets into Buffalo at 7.30 and 8 o’clock. 

Mr. Edmonds. From 7.30 o’clock to 9 o’clock, and when they are 
not running? 

Mr. Conway. No. 

Mr. Edmonds. Is the same fireroom force required in the port as 
while the boat is running? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; because the boat is shifting, running pumps, 
running auxiliary machinery, and you could not have just sufficient 
men for a minimum amount of work. You have got to have suffi¬ 
cient men to take care of the maximum amount of work. 

Mr. Edmonds. I was just wondering whether it was a requirement 
of the union? 

Mr. Conway. No. 

Mr. Edmonds. It is a regulation requirement ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Let me call your attention to Mr. Shonts’s boat on a run of seven 
and one-half hours between Detroit and Cleveland. They used to 
employ these men for two watches before the seamen’s law; employ 
them in three now. 

Mr. Edmonds. Tell me about the sand boats. They say they have 
got to carry extra firemen on the sand boats that lay up all night. 

Mr. Conway. I do not know much about the sand boats. Our men 
are not generally employed on sand boats, and I am not going to 
testify to anything to this committee that I am not positive of. 

Mr. Free. What about the boats that carry the pulp wood where 
they get a load for two or three days ? 

Mr. Conway. That was Capt. Crosby’s boat. He claimed the 
seamen’s law put three or four extra men on, but it was not a state¬ 
ment of the facts. 

Mr. Free. What he claims, as I recollect the testimony, was that 
they took this run and then went into port, two or three days loading 
there, so that they have a lot of these men during that period and 
some were idle during unloading. 

Mr. Conway. Mr. Congressman, on this boat there is much repair 
work to be done, not only keeping up steam but keeping the boat 
pumped out. Those are wooden boats and they look, the same as 
Congressman Scott said about Mr. Rogers’s boat, that it was an old 
hulk of a boat. These boats are about the same as Capt. Crosby’s. 

Mr. Edmonds. The firemen do not do calking? 

Mr. Conway. No. 


310 AMENDING SECTIONS'2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Edmonds. What are they used at in repairing? 

Mr. Conway. Machinery. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do they repair machinery or do they require me¬ 
chanics? 

Mr. Conway. The firemen always repair machinery. They assist 
and the engineer oversees. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do they do the same thing on the Lakes ? 

Mr. Conway. I have done most every kind of conceivable work 
that it was possible to do in the engine room when I was fireman 
aboard a steamboat. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do firemen clean boilers and tubes? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do they tighten up nuts and bolts under the en¬ 
gineer’s supervision ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; they do everything they are told. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do they do it to-day? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely. 

Mr. Edmonds. They do not go out and get machinists to do that 
sort of work when they get to landing places ? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely. One of our members working on the 
Juanita as an electrician, and a representative of the electricians’ 
union came down while at the dock. He said, “What are you doing 
here?” The man said, “I am repairing this electric work.” He 
said, “ You should apply to the electrician for that.” He said, “ Go 
and see Conway.” He never came to see me. It is well known what 
I would tell him; that I told the fireman to do even the taking out 
of the staples and they want all that work done by the firemen and 
have been striving to get the vessel owners to say that, but some¬ 
how we can not get cooperation from them to do that work. 

Mr. Free. How many months did you work in the year? 

Mr. Conway. In some of the boats we worked 75 days, as Mr. 
Thorp said. He has got one boat that employs the crew 75 days and 
then he has a crew out here. The majority of them are laid off when 
she is there. We do not get paid when we do not work. 

Mr. Free. What do you do the rest of the year? 

Mr. Conway. Care for the ship and do the best we can, and are 
thrown ashore. 

Mr. Scott. At the present time and for several years past the 
coal passers have had a definite character of work? 

Mr. Conway. In port they do anything they are told 

Mr. Scott. Let us see whether that is so. Here is a ship one day 
which stops at the Detroit River for coal. The coal bunker was en¬ 
tirely filled and some of the surplus coal spilled out on the deck 
while they were loading it into the bunkers. As soon as the coal 
was settled into the bunker the captain asked the engineer to ask the 
coal passers to shovel the coal from the deck into the bunker. Is 
that part of their work? 

Mr. Conway. No ; that was at sea. 

Mr. Scott. No; this was at the dock. 

Mr. Conway. No; she had left and the coal had sunk down after 
they had used sufficient out of the bunker. 

Mr. Scott. I am confining myself to the facts that are presented to 
me. The coal passers refused to shovel the coal into the bunkers. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 311 

The captain then asked the deck hands to shovel the coal. Is that 
part of their work? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; it is. 

Mr. Scott. The deck hands insisted that they were not employed 
to handle coal, and so finalH the captain and mate were compelled 
to shovel in the coal themselves. 

Mr. Conway. Will you be kind enough to tell me the name of the 
boat? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; it was one of the Charcoal Iron Co.’s boats. 

Mr. Conway. I have never heard of that company. What is the 
name of the boat? 

Mr. Scott. Y ou have never heard of the Charcoal Iron Co. ? It is 
a very large concern. 

Mr. Conway. No. 

Mr. Scott. Then 3 r ou have missed something, because they are a 
tremendous concern. They have at least five furnaces in the north 
end of my district. 

Mr. Conway. How many steamboats have they ? 

Mr. Scott. I do not know. 

Mr. Conway. There are many big concerns ashore that I have 
never heard of. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; a boat witli a registered tonnage of 2,500 tons. 
Prior to the enforcement of the act she was navigated by 18 men, so 
that she must be a fairly good-sized ship. 

Mr. Conway. Yes; they have very small crews on the Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. I have not the name of the boat. 

Mr. Conway. All of those boats have smaler crews than any place 
in the world. 

Mr. Scott. After the coal is put there into the bunkers and spills 
out on the deck and the boat passes the dock the coal passers can not 
go up on deck and shovel the coal ? 

Mr. Conway. It is not fair to ask a coal passer to come out of a 
hot fireroom and onto the deck. If they do it in the summer, they 
will have to do it in the winter. 

Mr. Scott. I presume. 

Mr. Conway. I think it is unfair and unreasonable and inhuman. 

Mr. Hardy. They were in a sweat box below and it is cold up there. 

Mr. Conway. And if they start doing it in the summer the practice 
will become law and they will have to do it in the fall. 

Mr. Scott. In your statement you said this law only required the 
ships to put on one extra man. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. You meant firemen or coal passers? 

Mr. Conway. I specifically stated Mr. Crosby’s boat that he talked 
of, that he claimed the seamen’s law put three or four men on. 

Mr. Scott. You do not claim that in all cases under the seamen’s 
law it simply requires the ship to put on one extra man ? 

Mr. Conway. If they formerly carried 4 they now carried 6, and 
on Mr. Newman’s boat, where they carried 16^ they now carry 18, 
and on Mr. Shont’s boats —The Eastern States and The Western 
States —where they formerly carried 9 they now carry 9, and long 
before the seamen’s law they employed 9 and employ the same num¬ 
ber now. 


312 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to say that in all instances the sea¬ 
men’s law simply compels the ship to put on one extra man ? 

Mr. Conway. No; but I do mean to say that on the boat Mr. 
Crosby testified to having three or four men that they had only one 
man. That is what the seamen’s law did. 

Mr. Scott. One fireman? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; and I do not think there can be any contradic¬ 
tion of that. 

Mr. F ree. Are you opposing the lengthening of the season ? 

Mr. Conway. There is only one thing I want you to do for me and 
my people. We work in a hot fireroom, and at the time of an acci¬ 
dent I want you to provide a reasonable opportunity to leave the 
vessel at the time of the accident. I think I am as well entitled to it 
as people in a theater, for whom they furnish fire escapes and all 
the different things. All I want is a reasonable opportunity, and 
my experience on the water is that 1 want a lifeboat. If this com¬ 
mittee wants to assume the responsibility of extending the season in 
so far as the traveling public is concerned, please furnish sufficient 
boats for the firemen to get into. We want the boats; we do not 
want the life rafts or the preservers, as we would not last as long in 
the water coming out of the fireroom, because we can not stand it. 

Mr. Gahn. On the Great Lakes all the freighters have 100 per cent 
lifeboats all the time. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that the reason you are speaking of—the reason 
for this provision of the seamen’s bill; that the seamen shall not be 
shifted alternately to work in the fireroom and on deck ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; and there was not even a vessel owner and I 
do not think it can be found in the hearings, where one single vessel 
owner objected to it. 

Mr. Scott. In most of the passenger vessels now they have self¬ 
blowing flues? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. They are automatic, and they blow them by 
hand. Any one of them is automatic, but you will find the hand- 
flue blower. 

Mr. Scott. It is not the same as the old system ? 

Mr. Conway. No; in the old system we used to blow them by hand. 
We still blow them by hand every day, because the automatic flue 
blower gets short and leaves two or three at the top and bottom that 
it does not touch. 

Mr. Scott. That is all I want to ask. 

Mr. Jefferis. You state here that this law was changed to be 
applicable not only to the Great Lakes, but to the ocean as well. 

Mr. Conw t ay. Yes, sir; and it is a change in the present law, as 
far as the ocean is concerned. 

Mr. Edmonds. That only applies to short trips. 

Mr. Conway. It applies to all boats, irrespective of the length of 
trip, in so far as oilers and water tenders are concerned. 

Mr. Edmonds. Only to short runs, for firemen. 

Mr. Conway. The 16 hours would apply on the ocean, too. 

Mr. Edmonds. The 16 hours’ run will apply on the ocean ? 

Mr. Conway. If it happens to get into port, it will apply to prac¬ 
tically every coastwise vessel. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 1&, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 313 

Mr. Scott. Connected with the coastwise trade ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. It would not apply on transatlantic or transpacific 
business ? 

Mr. Conway. In reference to oil and water tenders, undoubtedly, 
yes; there is no question. 

Mr. Edmonds. This affects the oilers and water tenders both on 
the ocean, and the firemen; does it not ? 

Mr. Jefferis. What is meant by continuous run of 16 hours or 
more? 

Mr. Conway. I did not draw the bill. 

Mr. Jefferis. I am trying to find out something. 

Mr. Conway. It is a continuous run. I can run practically from 
Duluth to Buffalo with a 16-hour run, if they will let me’ in 16 
hours. 

Mr. Scott. That has been interpreted to mean trip run from one 
terminal to the other. 

Mr. Conway. By the courts. 

Mr. Jefferis. It does not mean reverse and come back. 

Mr. Conway. From one terminal to the other, from Buffalo to 
, Detroit, and from Detroit to Port Huron, and Port Huron to Macki¬ 
naw Island, and Mackinaw Island to the Soo, and from the Soo 
to the Portage, and from the Portage to Duluth. 

Mr. Jefferis. Just one continuous run. 

Mr. Conway. It stops within 16 hours all the time. It makes any 
of those ports within 16 hours. 

Mr. Scott. The trip run on the D. & C. lias been interpreted that 
way. 

Mr. Conway. That is you interpretation. 

Mr. Scott. That is the interpretation. That is easily corrected in a 

bill. 

Mr. Conway. We have been 22 years trying to get the other. 

Mr. Scott. Possibly if they had paid a little more attention to it 
and not made a joke out of it you might have gotten more relief. 

Mr. Hardy. I certainly do not like that sort of expression. Here is 
a bill which Members of Congress have made up. 

Mr. Scott. You misunderstood my statement. 

Mr. Hardy. I must have misunderstood it. 

Mr. Scott. The people on the Great Lakes have felt all along that 
this law can not and would not work on the Great Lakes. I may be 
doing an injustice to them but that is the viewpoint I take of it, and 
instead of coming down and laying their cards out on the table and 
explaining the exact situation on the Great Lakes and attempting to 
bring about relief, they simply leave it in the dark as far as the Great 
Lakes are concerned and utilize what testimony and information they 
have and drafted this law, and I really feel that the committee was 
not made familiar and it was impossible for them to get familiar, 
and that with the facts affecting the Great Lakes this law would have 
been modified in respects. 

Mr. Conway. Let me call your attention to the fact that in the 
hearings which I attended on the seamen’s law, not only were a large 
number of men here representing vessel owners, that are here now, but 
all the lake carriers and all the vessel owners of every class of freight,. 


314 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

lumber carriers, were down here at times and they all testified before 
the committees. 

Mr. Scott. What is meant by trip run in my bill ? What I intended 
it to mean, and I have not any particular pride in phraseology, as I 
am perfectly willing to have it mean what it is intended to mean, is 
that by trip run I meant that a trip run is where a ship is scheduled 
on a regular route. To illustrate, the D. & C. has a run from Detroit 
to Mackinaw Island. That is their regular run, and the amount of 
time consumed in the run constitutes their continuous sailing time. 
That is what was meant. 

Mr. Conway. But, unfortunately, Congressmen, you may have all 
the well meaning in the world so far as your interpretation is con¬ 
cerned, but will all people interpret it so ? 

Mr. Scott. They will when we get through with it. 

Mr. Conway. A continuous run; 16 hours’ continuous run. If a 
boat stops, it is not continuous. Say, for instance, I run from Buffalo 
to Detroit and it takes me 16 hours; I stop. Then I leave Detroit 
for Port Huron; I stop. I leave Port Huron and go to Mackinaw 
Island; I stop. I go from Mackinaw Island to the Soo; I stop. 
I go from the Soo to the Portage; I stop. I go from the Portage to 
Duluth and stop. All of these runs are passenger boats and less 
than 16 hours. I do not think they will all do it in less than 16 hours 
in some of those boats. 

Mr. Scott. It will take in boats that have a run of less than 16 hours. 

Mr. Conway. Will it take in boats between coastwise points, boats 
running on the coast, 16 hours or less, no matter how many stops? 
They may stop two hours. 

Mr. Scott. No. 

Mr. Conway. They may stop two hours at a port. I am not a 
lawyer. I do not want to go into that question. 

Mr. Hardy. Were not the lake boat owners down here at hearings 
previously in reference to what should be classed able seamen on the 
Lakes and in every way looking after lake interests ? 

Mr. Conway. About five times before this hearing. 

Mr. Hardy. Those hearings extended from 1913 to 1915. 

Mr. Conway. At one time I was down here before the Committee 
on Commerce for 30 days. 

Mr. Hardy. The Senate committee? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; the Senate Committee on Commerce—for 30 
days. That was the time when there was some impeachment proceed¬ 
ings going on of some judge in Pennsylvania—Archbald. 

Mr. Jefferis. You have stated here also that the steamboat inspec¬ 
tion law has been the cause of the increase of the number of men on 
some of these vessels. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. Can you tell us a little more about that ? 

Mr. Conway. The only think you can tell is that the law says that 
the boats shall be certificated as“the steamboat inspector thinks rea¬ 
sonable and as she can be reasonably safely navigated, and if investi¬ 
gation finds that for the safe navigation of the vessel the vessel 
should employ coal passers he puts coal passers on. And if he finds 
that it does not need coal passers—and there are boats that do not 
carry coal passers—he does not put them on, as the seamen’s law 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 315 


does not put on any coal passers, and nobody by any stretch of 
imagination can say that the law does put coal passers on. 

Mr. Scott. When was the order made by the Secretary of Com¬ 
merce and Steamboat Inspection Service compelling them to put on 
coal passers? 

Mr. Conw t ay. When was the order made? There was no order 
made. The law was changed to read that no man should be employed 
in the fireroom or on deck and in the fireroom. They could not be 
taken, in other words, from one department to the other, from the 
deck to the fireroom or from the fireroom to the deck. 

Mr. Jefferis. That is the seamen’s law? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; but the law does not say that she shall carry 
extra coal passers. The steamboat inspector gets aboard the vessel 
and inspects the vessel and while inspecting the vessel he certificates 
the vessel for the number of men to be employed, and if the boat 
does not need coal passers in the judgment of the inspector for the 
safe navigation of the vessel, he does not put coal passers on. If she 
does need coal passers for the safe navigation of the vessel, in the 
judgment of the United States steamboat local inspector, the coal 
passers are put on. 

Mr. Scott. And then it is not by general order. 

Mr. Conway. No; it is all to the judgment of the inspector. 

Mr. Edmonds. Did these coal passers get on there when they are 
required by the Commissioner of Navigation, because the firemen re¬ 
fused to pass coal? 

Mr. Conway. No, sir; the fireman has to do as he is told out on 
the Lakes. 

Mr. Edmonds. If you have a small boat, possibly five or six tons, 
do they put coal passers on that boat? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; if in the judgment of the local inspector it is 
necessary for the safe navigation of the boat. 

Mr. Edmonds. They did that before the passage of the seamen’s 
law. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. Let me tell you what used to happen to the 
coal passers before the seamen’s act on a boat, when I was employed 
on the steamer Chicago. We got into Buffalo. This is an instance of 
what used to happen. Coal passers go on watch 12 o’clock midnight. 
I would be in my fireroom from 12 o’clock at midnight to 6 o’clock 
in the morning handling ashes and passing coal and assisting the 
firemen. We would get into Buffalo at 6.30 o’clock and pull up to 
the freight dock. The coal passer would then become a deck hand 
and go on deck. The boat would have to take a load of package 
freight, and between deck loads they would take so much freight off 
and have it off by noon. We would have three or four holds of 
grain. The deck hand who was a coal passer outside was working 
all morning around the dock and cleaning up the mess made by the 
package freight. 

Then they would shift to the elevator and the coal passer-deckhand 
would go up and handle the lines and sometimes he would be at the 
elevator all that night. If she went to one of the one-legged ele¬ 
vators, Mr. Deckhand-Coal Passer had to sweep the grain after the 
scoopers came along. He would work all night. At 7 o’clock in the 
morning she would go back to the west-bound dock and they would 


316 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

load the vessel with packet freight all day long and Mr. Deckhand- 
Coal Passer was up shifting her from one end of the dock to the 
other and handling dunnage and keeping her clean and she would 
clear at 11 o’clock that night loaded with packet freight and Mr. 
Deckhand would be up all day and go on watch at night. The 
general practice was that the deckhand could only last one trip and 
he was discharged because he was played out at the end of it. 

Mr. Scott. When did they sleep—m the winter time ? 

Mr. Bosenblum. That is when they fish. 

Mr. Conway. It is a well-known fact that the deckhand-coal pass¬ 
ers’ hours of labor were a 26-hour day. 

Mr. Scott. If they did that on the ship from year to year, where 
did they finally get their deck hands? 

Mr. Conway. That is where the 1,300 or 1,400 per cent turnover 
occurred, where the young American came on shipboard and stayed 
on the boat for 8 or 10 days and finding the conditions, and be¬ 
ing an American hunted up another vessel and tried it out there and 
finding the condition there exactly the same, tried another vessel and 
at last gave up. 

Mr. Hardy. Is not that the reason you seamen worked for 20 years 
trying to get some protection ? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely. The same men that owned the vessels 
then all own them now. Leaving it to their judgment, is there any 
reason that we object? Is there any reason that we would agree to 
go back to conditions where men were worked as long as 36 hours, 
and, Mr. Congressman, if it is, we will soon change it. We have 
been 21 years trying to get it and that is a long time. 

Mr. Scott. You were trying to get a bill then? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; we were assisting. We were telling Congress 
the conditions just like we are telling the truth here now. I think 
the committee was in the same frame of mind then as you gentlemen 
are here now. 

Mr. Jefferis. Does this steamboat-inspection law place discretion 
in the local inspector to decide the number of men that these differ¬ 
ent boats shall have? 

Mr. Conway. The number of coal passers; yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. The whole crew. 

Mr. Jefferis. How about the other employees? 

Mr. Conway. The law says that the firemen on all boats of 100 
tons gross or over, that the firemen shall be employed three watches 
and you can not work one man three watches. 

Mr. Mills. Irrespective of the length of run. 

Mr. Conway. The length of run does not make it any different. 

Mr. Mills. The length of day work, whether he works the four 
hours or whether he works the eight hours. 

Mr. Conway. I never heard of a fireman working that. 

Mr. Mills. As far as the law is concerned. 

Mr. Conway. I know of no boat that works firemen only four 
hours. A steamboat is not a locomotive. A passenger locomotive 
fireman comes into the dopt with the train and the hostler takes the 
engine to the roundhouse and the hostlers in the roundhouse pre¬ 
pare the engine and get her in shape so that the next fireman gets on 
board and gets the steam up. It is not so in a steamboat. The fire- 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 317 


man does all the hostler’s work and much more than is done on a 
locomotive, and as far as letting the fires go out, it is much more 
profitable for the steamboat to keep the fire going all the time on 
these boats that the bill will affect, the passenger boats. 

Mr. Mills. Prior to this law, what did they work the firemen on 
those boats? 

Mr. Conway. Eight hours on some boats. 

Mr. Mills. Three watches? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; a 56-hour week and an 84-hour week in two 
watches. 

Mr. Mills. Before the act went into effect, were there any of those 
boats that worked the firemen 12 hours a day ? 

Mr. Conway. Twelve continuous hours? 

Mr. Mills. Twelve out of 24. 

Mr. Conway. Some, yes; most of those boats, yes. But let me call 
to your attention about operating boats here. I do not know if. you 
were here when Mr. Newman testified that it only made an addition 
on this boat that carried 15 firemen, that it only made an addition 
of 2 firemen in three watches, and this is when everybody is getting 
an 8-hour day and a 48-hour week. It is not asking too much to 
come here and ask you to let us retain the 56-hour week when every¬ 
body ashore in the basic industries of the country are getting a 48- 
hour week, and we work Sundays without extra pay. We work all 
the time. 

Mr. Jefferis. Do you insist that this seamen’s law has been the 
cause of the increase of the number of men on the boats? You con¬ 
tend that it is not the seamen’s law that increased the number of men 
or caused the increase, but that it is the Steamboat-Inspection Serv¬ 
ice that determines and requires a certain number of men to run these 
boats. Is that true ? 

Mr. Conway. That is true; the steamboat inspector certificates the 
vessel and he certificates the vessel crew. He tells the number of 
men to put on the vessel; the seamen’s law did not tell you that. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not true that until the passage of this law the 
Steamboat-Inspection Service had no restriction, but that after the 
passage of this law they had to have a crew sufficient to carry out 
the provisions of the law ? 

Mr. Conway. That is true about boats anywhere. The testimony 
given before this committee is that the seamen’s law, as Capt. Crosby 
said, the seamen’s law has put four extra men on his boat. It is not 
true. It only put one man on the boat. Capt. Davidson says that 
the seamen’s law put 5 on, from 18 to 23, and the fact is that he only 
put 1 extra man on, and that was an oiler. 

Mr. Scott. Then you are just going right back on your tracks. 
Mr. Jefferis asked you a question whether or not the seamen’s law 
put any extra men on ships or whether there was a regulation by the 
Department of Commerce. You said yourself that was true, that 
the seamen’s law did not put a single living soul on. 

Mr. Conway. I do not think I would have said that. 

Mr. Scott. It was in substance. 

Mr. Conway. I do not think so. 

Mr. Lazaro. I think the misunderstanding came about because the 
witness has made a detailed explanation of the part the law played 


318 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

and of the part the Steamboat-Inspection Service played before Mr. 
Jefferis came in. 

Mr. Jefferis. Doubtless. The witness answers in regard to coal 
passers and had that in mind. 

Mr. Scott. Your testimony is only directed at the coal passers and 
firemen and the water tenders. You are testifying as to the number 
of men, extra men, that were put on, the firemen, w T ater tenders, coal 
passers, under that law. You are not attempting to testify to the 
number of extra men required by the seamen’s law or number of able 
seamen. 

Mr. Conway. The boat that I spoke of was Capt. Crosby’s boat, 
and if you will remember, he testified that the seamen’s law put three 
or four extra men on the boat, and I claim it did not. 

Mr. Scott. Let us see whether that is right or not. How many 
extra firemen did it put on ? 

Mr. Conway. One. 

Mr. Scott. How many extra oilers ? 

Mr. Conway. None. 

Mr. Scott. How many extra coal passers ? 

Mr. Conway. I do not know how many extra coal passers, but the 
seamen’s law does not claim to put any coal passers on. 

Mr. Scott. That is your statement, and I am simply using your 
statement for the sake of discussing, accepting it as the facts. I 
assume it is accurate that under the seamen’s law they were allowed 
to use the deck hands as coal passers. 

Mr. Conway. That is true. 

Mr. Scott. And when the law went into effect it precluded the use 
of coal passers ? 

Mr. Conway. That is true. 

Mr. Scott. And therefore they had to use the same number of 
deck hands. 

Mr. Conway. Not necessarily. 

Mr. Scott. Did they have to use the same number of coal passers? 

Mr. Conway. Not necessarily. “ For the safe navigation of the 
vessel, in the judgment of the steamboat inspector.” 

It all depends on what he thinks. 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. If the boat can be safely navigated. 

Mr. Scott. You say that the law put on the boat one extra fireman. 
You do not know how many extra coal passers? 

Mr. Conway. Two extra coal passers; but the seamen’s law did not 
do that. 

Mr. Scott. But the law was passed and after the law was passed, 
whether m consequence of the law or anvthing else, it did put on 
possibly, some extra coal passers ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. How many extra seamen did he put on ? 

Mr. Conway. In his boat ? 

Mr. Scott. In his boat. 

Mr. Conway. He never carried able seamen. I am a fireman. 

Flease excuse me answering that. 

Mr. Scott. I want it distinctly understood that your testimony is 
directed at the three unions you represent—coal passers, firemen, and 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 319 


water tenders—-and I do not want that much to be misunderstood; 
it you are testifying as to the total number of extra men required 
on entire ship under the sections of the La Follette seamen’s act. 

Mr. Conway. Yes; but, Mr. Congressman, he testified that they 
w'ere putting on an extra cook. The extra cook was not put on until 
1918, and that was put on by the Shipping Board. He said that the 
seamen’s law did that, and he said that the seamen’s law put on two 
coal passers. If the boat could be safely navigated without the two 
coal passers he would not have to employ two coal passers. 

Mr. Scott. What provision Avas there for the Shipping Board 
to compel the ship to put on an extra cook? 

Mr. Conway. None. It was a mutual agreement between the 
vessel owner and the men employed that they submitted the matter 
to them for decision, and they, after a very thorough examination, 
said that the second cook was necessary. 

Mr. Scott. To feed all the men on board? 

Mr. Conway. I am not a second cook, and I do not know the second 
cook’s duties. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me ask a question or two. Under the seamen’s bill, 
your firemen can not be used to go on deck. The deck men can not 
be forced into the fireroom and made to pass coal and the coal man 
put back on deck. 

Mr. Conway. That is true. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it not just possible that some of the work that has 
been done in this way, exchanging from the deck to the fireroom and 
from the fireroom to the deck, was because they did not have any¬ 
body else to do that ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Was not that then brought about by some amendment 
incorporated into the law? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely, and there was not one vessel owner that 
objected to that section of the law. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to say to this committee that you are 
attempting to revert to the old position? Let me direct your atten¬ 
tion to line 16. 

Mr. Conavay. Your bill does not change that section. 

Mr. Scott. I say here in line 19, at the end of the line, “ The 
seamen shall not be shipped to work alternately in the fireroom and 
on the deck.” I haA^e not attempted to change that. 

Mr. Conaa^ay. No. 

Mr. Hardy. If that remains, as in this bill Avill it be necessary to 
have coal passers? 

Mr. Conavay. Sure; if in the judgment of the steamboat inspector . 
that the coal passers were necessary he will have to maintain coal 
passers. 

Mr. Scott. Under the amendment that I proposed? 

Mr. Conavay. Certainly. 

Mr. Hardy. Then there is some necessity for employing those two 
coal passers on Capt. Crosby’s vessel and it would continue under 
this ? 

Mr. Conavay. Yes; but they will have to come here and testify 
before this committee that the boat laid up here, and that the cause 
of it was the seamen’s laAv. They even blame the poor peach crop 


520 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

to the seamen’s law, and the reduction of population in certain places. 
It has been blamed for a great many sins. 

Mr. Chindblom. That will do for a joke, but that was not seri¬ 
ously brought out in the examination. It was not here said that 
the peach crop was decreased by reason of the seamen’s law. It will 
go for a joke. 

Mr. Conway. I did not mean it that way. There was testimony 
brought out here that boats were taken off on certain routes, and 
when questions were asked of the reason for it the man said that it 
was the peach crop, that the seamen’s law was responsible for taking 
off the vessel. 

Mr. Scott. Before the seamen’s law went into effect, on all the 
vessels of the Great Lakes, from the time when they started to navi¬ 
gate on the Great Lakes, before the passage of the seamen’s law, 
they used two watches of firemen. 

Mr. Conway. On all boats ? 

Mr. Scott. Some of the boats. There is no law compelling them 
to use three. 

Mr. Conway. No; there was no law. 

Mr. Scott. On many of the boats they used two watches of fire¬ 
men, two watches of coal passers, and two watches of water tenders. 
Is that true? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; not on all boats. 

Mr. Scott. I will modify that in order to concur with your sug¬ 
gestion. But you will admit on many boats they used those tyro 
watches in those three departments. 

Mr. Conway. Yes; that is true. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean to state to this committee that when you 
increased it to three watches in the fireroom, covering the firemen, 
coal passers, and water tenders, that you did not increase the number 
of men required to work ? 

Mr. Conway. A good many boats carry water tenders and oilers, 
and the boat that you were on—the Northland —did not increase the 
crew one, on the Northland. 

Mr. Scott. The Northland went out of business before that year. 
I was on the Northland in 1900. 

Mr. Conway. She had three watches then for firemen, oilers, and 
water tenders. 

Mr. Scott. It was a long run—1,066 miles. 

Mr. Conway. She plied from Cleveland to Detroit and Mackinaw 
Island, stopped at the Soo and the Portage. I think she did not 
in later years, but stopped at Duluth. 

Mr. Rosenblum. You have told us that the firemen are kept rather 
busy in port. What do the oilers and water tenders do in port? 

Mr. Conway. The water tender has a very particular job and has 
got to keep his water from getting too much temperature, because if 
he allows too much water to get into the boilers water will come 
out over in the auxiliary steam line and go into the auxiliary ma¬ 
chinery and destroy or burst the cylinder heads off. 

Mr. Rosenblum. That keeps him busy ? 

Mr. Conway. He washes the boilers, too. 

Mr. Rosenblum. Are the oilers busy in port ? 

Mr. Conway. Take the Western States on which I was employed 
for two and a half months. I was on the first watch from 6, and 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 321 

we had 6-hour watches until 12 at night and from 6 to 12 in the 
morning. I would go on watch as the boat was leaving Detroit and 
stay on watch until midnight and go on watch at 6 o’clock in the 
morning and get into Buffalo about 8 or 9 o’clock. I had to then go 
around; the first job I had was to go with the second engineer into 
the paddle wheels and try every nut that was on the paddle wheels 
with wrenches and hammers. That section of the wheel which was 
under the water we turned it up and tried all the sections first on 
this side and then on the other side and then go to the reverse engine 
and try it there. I had to go in the engine room to clean the dope 
cups and to do packing if there was any glands that needed packing 
and had to assist in doing all that. That is how men learn to become 
engineers. You would be busy all the time on board. 

Mr. Rosenblum. As a matter of fact, then, there is work for all the 
extra men in port, that they complain of ? 

Mr. Conway. Absolutely, because Capt. Simpson plainly stated 
before this committee that because the boat was at the dock was no 
reason the men were not working. He very clearly stated that. 

Mr. Gahn. How about the sand boats? 

Mr. Conway. I am not familiar with sand boats and can not 
testify as to them. 

Mr. Jefferis. Will this proposed amendment to section 2 provided 
in the Scott bill increase or diminish the number of firemen, oilers, 
and water tenders on passenger boats? 

Mr. Conway. Some boats it may have a tendency to diminish. 
For instance, take the biggest passenger boat on the Great Lakes, 
of the D. & C. Before the seamen’s law that boat employed 16 fire¬ 
men. Under the new law she employs 18. 

Mr. Gahn. They had to employ 24, but by agreement were allowed 
to carry 18. 

Mr. Conway. Mr. Newman was a little bit mixed up there, and we 
got along very nicely with the work with the vessel owners, as we 
are accustomed to it. We always suggested those things and they 
were satisfied, and I am surprised to hear, and I do not think so now, 
that anybody connected with the steamboat business would think 
that it is reasonable to work their firemen 84 hours a week. 

Mr. Gahn. The law required 24 on the D. & C., not 18 ? 

Mr. Conway. Eighteen. 

Mr. Jefferis. It requires that number on a steamboat. 

Mr. Conway. She is certificated for 18 firemen. 

Mr. Jefferis, It is not the seamen’s law, then. 

Mr. Hardy. But she is certificated for 18 firemen under the sea¬ 
men’s law. . . 

Mr. Jefferis. They are the ones that determine the operation of 

the seamen’s law. 

Mr. Hardy. Exactly; that is correct. 

Mr. Jefferis, Suppose you decrease the firemen under this pro¬ 
posed amendment. Is that made possible by the extension of the 

hours of service? , _ ... , 

Mr. Conway. Yes; you have to extend the hours of labor of men to 
84 hours a week, and that will be done, gentlemen. 

Mr. Hardy. How would the two-watch system extend the hours 
of service to 84 hours a week? 

48420—21-21 


322 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Conway. Under the three-watch system the firemen work 8 
hours and under the two-watch system they work 12 hours; 7 times 
8 is 56. On the three-watch system. 7 times 12 is 84. They would 
go on the 84-hour week. 

Mr. Jefferis. Continuous 8 or 12 hours? 

Mr. Conway. No; they work three on and six off, four on and 
eight off. On all those boats they work three on and six off, on a 
vast majority of them, with the exception of one boat. 

Mr. Jefferis. Suppose you have the two-watch system. How 
long do the firemen work? 

Mr. Conway. Six hours on and six hours off. 

Mr. Hardy. Twice a day off. 

Mr. Conway. That is 12 hours a day. Under the two watches you 
work six hours at night and rest six hours in the morning up to 12 
o’clock noon, and then go to work at 12 o’clock noon and work until 
6 at night. 

Mr. Jefferis. I thought you said they had something else to do 
while off, working off the watch. 

Mr. Kosenblum. That is in port, tied up. 

Mr. Conway. When we are on watch. We never break the watch 
to do daywork. This bill is supposed to get the boats to run. I do 
not know if you were here when I explained just how the boats most 
complained of run on the D. & C. 

Mr. Jefferis. I tried to get a general idea of what was being done. 

Mr. Conway. It does not affect the man ashore, not accustomed to 
watch and watch or three and two watch. The best and clearest 
explanation of the watch-and-watch system is that the two-watch 
system gives 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, or 84 hours. The three- 
watch system is 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, 56 hours. 

Mr. Jefferis. On a continuous run across the ocean, would you 
say you would have three watches? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Jefferis. On a short run that would not take more than 15 
hours in a day, the two-watch system would not require any more 
work than the three-watch system under a longer run. 

Mr. Conway. If you were on a short run across the ocean, instead 
of having two men on watch, you would be more apt to have four. 
The boats on the Lakes are manned with less men than any place in 
the world, considering the tonnage. 

Mr. Scott. Then, in your three-watcli system you say you work six 
hours. How many hours on a three-watch system do you work in 
24 hours ? 

Mr. Conway. Eight. 

Mr. Scott. Eight hours out of the 24 ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; and as I called to the attention of the committee 
before, it is a 56-hour week. All other workers are getting a 48-hour 
week. Surely to goodness, we are not unreasonable when we come to 
you and try to explain to you to leave us on the 56-hour week. We 
can not be called radicals when we do that. We are not unreasonable. 

Mr. Edmonds. If we were to change this section 2 to make it dis¬ 
tinctly understood that the continuous run meant from terminal to 
terminal, would that be objectionable to your union? 

Mr. Conway. To our union? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 323 

Mr. Edmonds. To your people? 

Mr. Conway. Our people object to working 12 hours a day. That 
would not change the hours of labor. That would not change at all 
the hours of labor. It would still mean 12 hours a day and an 84- 
hour week. 

Mr. Edmonds. Would not that leave the smaller freight boats that 
run around the different ports an opportunity to live, to exist, with¬ 
out employing unnecessary men? 

Mr. Conway. They have all been existing on freight boats, and I 
know of no reason for their being laid up, I take it for granted, in 
that situation, for instance; take the Great Lake Transit Corpora¬ 
tion; a big majority of their boats are laid up, stopped running, and 
they are package boats, too. 

Mr. Hardy. Suppose you had a run on each of those boats from 
where it started to where it landed the next day, and it goes back 
within 12 hours, and the whole run is 12 hours. Would that two- 
watch system operate for the firemen easier in that case ? 

Mr. Conway. Twelve hours a day for each of the firemen. 

Mr. Scott. Where do you know of such a trip where you could go 
back on the same run within 12 hours ? 

Mr. Conway. I assume the Congressman meant a run of 12 hours 
one way, load at the dock, and run 12 hours the next day. 

Mr. Hardy. That would be what it would amount to. 

Mr. Conway. Take the D. & C., Cleveland to Detroit, a 7^-hour 
run. 

Mr. Hardy. Give us that. 

Mr. Conway. Ask Capt. Simpson, who has testified. He is manag¬ 
ing or shore captain of these boats and they have a run of 7-J 
hours from Detroit to Cleveland. He frankly told this committee 
that because the boat was lying at the dock was no reason that the 
crew was not employed. 

Mr. Scott. No; and they kept their crew and they had it before 
the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Conway. Had what? 

Mr. Scott. Had the same crew that they have now. 

Mr. Conw t ay. The same men? 

Mr. Scott. The same number of men. 

Mr. Conw t ay. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean they had three watches. 

Mr. Scott. The law did not compel them to use three. They have 
always had three. 

Mr. Jefferis. The 74-hour run? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to get at why Capt. Simpson voluntarily put 
the three watches on the 7-hour run. 

Mr. Conway. He did not put the three watch in until the seamen s 
law. There are three watches now, and Capt. Simpson testified here 
that because the boats were at the docks was no reason that the men 
were not busy. In that respect he was fair, because he knows that 
the boats have got to be kept up. 

Mr. Hardy. How many watches were on that run before the sea¬ 
men’s law? 

Mr. Conway. Two watches. 


324 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. How long did they require these watches to work? 

Mr. Conway. Twelve hours, an 84-hour week, because I worked 
on that boat. 

Mr. Jefferis. Why do they have it for a 7|-hour run? 

Mr. Conway. You have to work to get the boat in shape; to get it 
ready to run. A steamboat is not like a railroad engine. 

Mr. Jefferis. I understand that. 

Mr. Conway. All this work has got to be done during the day. 

Mr. Jefferis. If you had one fellow running it up there, and you 
ran it up in 7J hours, he could certainly rest, and the other could then 
take care of it, could he not, if you had two watches? 

Mr. Conway. One man running 7-J hours and the other man work¬ 
ing 16J hours? 

Mr. Jefferis. No; you will work 7 or 8 hours. Suppose you start 
off with 7-| hours’ run now from Buffalo to Cleveland. If one man 
could work that 7-J hours on the run from Buffalo to Cleveland or 
Detroit, that fellow then would quit, and some one else, the second 
watch, would take his place for the next hours, would he not? 

Mr. Conway. Seven and one-half hours ? 

Mr. Jefferis. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. When would he eat his meals ? 

Mr. Jefferis. You do not have to charge that as a part of the 
working time ? 

Mr. ConWay. No; I do not charge that, but I do not know how 
you could run along like that. You mean 7-| hours running, extend¬ 
ing the time longer than 6 continuous hours ? 

Mr. Jefferis. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. It is unreasonable to ask a man to stay in a hot 
fireroom, at 140 or 150° of heat 7 continuous hours. 

Mr. Jefferis. That would be working 8 hours, would it not? 

Mr. Conway. But under the condition that is unreasonable. I 
would not do it. 

Mr. Scott. We will take the illustration you made on the run from 
Detroit to Cleveland, 7| hours. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. How many firemen have they on there? 

Mr. Conway. Nine. 

Mr. Scott. Nine firemen? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. How long is it at the dock ? 

Mr. Conway. Well, she is there 16J hours out of 24 hours. 

Mr. Scott. She is in the dock 16J hours ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Nine of those firemen? How many did you say there 
were ? 

Mr. Conway. Nine. 

Mr. Scott. They are divided into three shifts? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean to say that while she is laying at the 
dock for 16 hours, that there is as much work to do on board the 
ship for those three firemen as there is for the three firemen out 
working during the run? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 325 

Mr. Conway. I say those men are kept extremely busy, and it 
has been so testified to by Capt. Simpson. She is 16 hours at the 
oock, she is there from 6 o’clock in the morning until night. 

Mr. Scott. Well, 15 hours. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. There has been some testimony introduced here that 
when they carried two or three firemen, when they got to the dock 
one fireman stayed down there to bank the fires, and the rest of the 
firemen went up town, and on the next trip the fireman that had 
stayed there during that watch would go up town and one of the 
other firemen would stay and keep hanking the fires. 

Mr. Conway. That was not the testimony in this hearing, was it? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. Was it in this hearing? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. That is something I missed. Will you kindly tell 
me who gave that testimony? 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Williams gave that testimony. 

Mr. Conway. On the sand boats? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; on the sand boats. 

Mr. Conway. I can not say anything about the sand boats. I do 
not want to talk about something I do not know anything about. 

Mr. Scott. A sand boat has an engine just the same as any other 
boat that is propelled by steam ? 

Mr. Conway. If the boat is at the dock, it is going to stay in a 
couple of hours, and the watch of two men is up, firemen are like 
other men, and they like to go to a picture show or something else, 
and if they did it, as long as they were off duty, I would not see any 
harm in it. 

The Chairman. Mr. Scott’s bill would not change the firemen, 
would it? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. In what way? 

Mr. Conway. It would put them on two watches. 

Mr. Scott. On short runs? 

Mr. Conway. That is largely getting back to the coal-passer ques¬ 
tion. On Mr. Bradley’s boat, the Bradley , that you do not seem to 
have a great amount of liking for, and the Zillah —and he has 
another boat—those boats were remodeled in so far as the coal bunk¬ 
ers were concerned. Mr. Blodgett went to the steamboat inspectors 
and showed them the plans for remodeling the boat—the bunkers— 
and the inspectors took the coal passers off, and they do not employ 
coal passers now. I want to call that to your attention to prove con¬ 
clusively that it is not the seamen’s law; it is the judgment of the 
steamboat inspector, not the seamen’s law, and that it is only the 
excuse for the addition of those men. Those men were taken off by 
the steamboat inspectors, and those boats are running to-day without 
any coal passers because of the fact that the boat could safely navi¬ 
gate, in the judgment of the steamboat inspectors, without coal pass¬ 
ers, and they are now running without coal passers, and there was no 
change in the seamen’s law to bring that about either. 

Mr. Edmonds. Let me ask you something about the operation of 
the 500-ton boat that carries a few passengers and a lot of fruit and 
vegetables and stuff from some fertile farms to a large city. 


326 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Conway. I do not know anything about these boats on the 
lake, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Edmonds. Have you not got any in Wisconsin, Mr. Scott, 
running down to Chicago? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Edmonds. We have a lot of them in Philadelphia. 

Mr. Conway. Will you kindly tell me one? 

Mr. Scott. The small packet ships. 

Mr. Conway. There are none running from Wisconsin down the 
lake, or any place in the lake, carrying package freight, with the 
exception of the steamboats that are in Mackinaw Island. 

Mr. Scott. How about the Goodrich line? 

Mr. Edmonds. In Philadelphia we have got a number of steamers 
that bring in farmers’ produce to the city—little 500-ton boats that 
carry probably one engineer and one fireman. 

Mr. Conway. I do not know of one on the Lakes, Mr. Congress¬ 
man. 

Mr. Edmonds. Under this law they would be compelled to carry 
three engineers and three firemen, I suppose. I do not know what 
their situation would be. I was just wondering. 

Mr. Conway. I do not know of one on the Lakes, Mr. Congress¬ 
man. 

Mr. Scott. I do not think the law applies to those. 

Mr. Edmonds. I thought it was possible that they had them on 
the Lakes just as we had down on the Delaware Bay. 

Mr. Conway. No. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you one more question, so as to 
get my mind straightened out as to this work to be done in port. 
Taking the vessel you mentioned, that has 18 firemen? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. And under the 3-watch system, that means six firemen 
to a watch? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. That means all six firemen are employed when she is 
under way? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. When she gets into port it does not take six firemen 
to keep up steam while she is in port, does it? 

Mr. Conway. To clean fires and blow flues. 

Mr. Mills. When you get into port you clean your fires? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. How long does that take? 

Mr. Conway. I should judge about 35 minutes for a fire. 

Mr. Mills. After the fires have been cleaned? 

Mr. Conway. There is more than one fire, Mr. Congressman? 

Mr. Mills. I said fires. 

Mr. Conway. It takes 35 minutes for one fire. 

Mr. Mills. It takes all six men for one ? 

Mr. Conway. I think she has 24 fires. I am not sure whether 
she has 24 or 28 fires. Each fireman has four or five fires to clean. 

Mr. Mills. It will take him 35 minutes to each fire? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; approximately. He has to clean fires or- 

Mr. Mills. So that would mean two hours work after he got in 
to clean fires? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 327 

Mr. Conway. Then, you know, Mr. Congressman, he has got to 
keep steam. 

Mr. Mills. After he has cleaned his fires what has he got to do? 

Mr. Conway. There are flues to blow. 

Mr. Mills. How long does that take? 

Mr. Conavay. On a boat like that, I should judge it would take 
one watch three or four hours. I do not think one watch could blow 
all the flues. I knoAv it used to take me three hours to blow three 
boilers of flues on the steamer Cheboygan , and it took me three good 
hours, and I had another fellow helping me hold steam tool. 

Mr. Mills. Let us see. That is four hours. 

Mr. Con\\ 7 ay. That accounts for six, does it not? 

Mr. Mills. No ; not as I figure it. I may be wrong. 

Mr. CoN\A r AY. You asked me first how long it would take to clean 
fires. 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. I said 35 minutes. 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. Then, on 24 fires on this boat. 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. One watch, say, for instance, would clean three- 
fourths of the fires, and then the other watch- 

Mr. Mills. They would not have time ? 

Mr. Scott. No; I do not think they would have time to clean all 
the fires. 

Mr. Mills. It would take four hours to clean all the fires ? 

Mr. Conway. I think it Avould, and keep steam. You know, Mr. 
Congressman, you can not take all the fires out and leave the boat 
without steam. 

Mr. Mills. I understand that. It will take four hours to do that, 
and then it is going to take three hours more ? 

Mr. Conavay. I think so ; yes. 

Mr. Mills. Seven hours ? 

Mr. Conavay. I think that is a very conservative estimate. 

Mr. Mills. How long does she stay in port ? 

Mr. Conavay. That boat comes in about a quarter to 8 or 8 in the 
morning and leaves at 9 at night. 

Mr. Mills. She is in port about 13 hours ? 

Mr. Conavay. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. After those six or seven hours are up, what have they 
got to do for the next six hours ? 

Mr. Conavay. That accounts already for over eight hours. 

Mr. Mills. I am not going to dispute it Avith you. We figured four 
hours, and then we figured three more, making seven. Let us take it 
for granted it is seven. That gives you six more hours. What have 
they got to do in those six hours. I assume you are not giving your¬ 
self the worst of it when you say seA^en hours. 

Mr. Conavay. I assume I am giving as close to the facts as I am 
capable in my humble Avay of giving them. 

Mr. Mills. Let us admit it is seven hours. What do they do for the 
next six hours? 

Mr. Conway. Now, Mr. Congressman, you are trying to say some¬ 
thing I can not say. One watch that goes down does not clean all 
the fires. 


328 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Mills. I know. 

Mr. Conway. Each watch that goes down cleans 6 or 8 fires out of 
24. They clean 8 fires and they do other work incident to handling 
the vessel, running the different pumps, and all the other work. Then 
the next watch has got that to do. 

Mr. Mills. Now, let us see. The vessel comes to port and the fire¬ 
men have the job of cleaning the fires and blowing the flues. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. And after that what do the firemen do? I am not in¬ 
terested in what the oilers do, or what the engineers do, or what the 
seamen do. What do the firemen do ? 

Mr. Conway. Will you allow me to give you the duty on the steamer 
G cfi Bf 

Mr. Mills. We are talking of one steamer. Let us not shift. 

Mr. Conway. That is the C. B. I will give you the duty of the 
firemen on that vessel from the time she comes in until she is ready to 
go out, if that is what you want. I will try and do that. 

Mr. Mills. I am more interested in the time it takes than in any 
duties enumerated. That will not get me anywhere. I am trying to 
get at a certain point, and if you will just allow me to pursue my 
inquiry I will be pleased to hear your statement afterwards. What 
do you do for the next six hours? 

Mr. Conway. That is not the way the boats are handled, that is 
not the way they are managed. 

Mr. Mills. I know that perfectly well, but you have got six 
hours in the fireroom. I do not care whether it is the first or second 
watch that happens to be there six hours. There are six hours out 
of 13 left. I want to know what are the duties of the firemen dur¬ 
ing the six hours, the fires having been cleaned and the flues blown. 

Mr. Conway. That is not the fact. The fact is that we have to 
clean some of the fires in the morning. If you have dirty fires, the 
boat will not go out. You have got to have some clean fires in the 
evening, and that means you have got to clean some of the fires in 
the morning. We could not get steam to run full speed if we had 
dirty fires at night. Fires will not last over six or seven hours. 
You have to clean fires exery six or seven hours. 

Mr. Mills. You do not get my point at all. Assuming that the 
full watch works, and they clean all of the fires, and they blow all 
of the flues, and they do it in seven hours, what remains to be done 
in the next six hours? Now, answer that question, will you not? 

Mr. Conway. Well, I am trying in my humble way to give the 
best answer that I can. If I can not make myself clear to you it 
is through my ignorance. 

Mr. Mills. No, it may be my stupidity; but let us try to get the 
matter. But what do they do for the next six hours ? 

Mr. Conway. That is not the way the men work, and I can not 
answer your question in that way. 

Mr. Mills. Is it not a fact that for the next six hours their only 
duty would be to keep the fires going? 

Mr. Conway. If that was the system; yes. But it can not be 
worked that way; it is impracticable. 

Mr. Mills. I know it is, and therefore I suggest that what actu¬ 
ally happens is that it does not take the entire watch all of its 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 329 

time in the fireroom while the vessel is tied up in port, because what 
would happen if they used all of the time would be to get the work 
done in seven hours. Now, as a matter of fact, what happens is a 
continuous process. They clean some of the fires and the} 7, keep the 
fires going in some of the others, do they not? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. And it lasts all the 16 hours, that process? 

Mr. Conway. That is true. 

Mr. Mills. But it does not take the full watch all of its time while 
it is being done, does it? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; with the cleaning of fires, the blowing of flues, 
and the keeping up of steam; yes, it does. 

Mr. Mills. But you and I agree that if they worked their full time 
it could be done in seven hours?- 

Mr. Conway. If it was practical, yes; I will agree, but it is im¬ 
practicable. If you cleaned fires at 6 o’clock in the morning, or at 
8 o’clock, in the morning, when the boat would be ready to go out in 
the evening, the fires would be dirty again, and you could not get 
steam. It would be impracticable. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Mr. Conway, you gave me to understand that 
the work in port was just as hard as the work at sea. Any way 
you take it you have got 7 hours actual work spread over 13, and 
you might say it takes actually the whole 13 hours, but I can not 
follow you when you say it is just as hard work as the work at sea. 

Mr. Conway. There is a difference between cleaning fires and 
shoveling coal into fires. When you clean fires and pull the charred 
clinkers and the burnt coal out, you are over a melting mass, and 
there is considerable gas coming from that melting mass, and that 
makes the conditions much harder than if there was no gas there at 
all. You are inhaling that gas because you have got to be that close 
to it in order to pull all this stuff, and sometimes you even burn your 
shoes with it. I have had my shoes burned time and time again 
with it, and have had my overalls catch fire with it, and you have 
got to be over that stuff. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. You do not want to modify your statement that 
the work in port is just as hard as the work at sea? 

Mr. Conway. No; I can not do it. 

Mr. Free. Give me an illustration of your routine during the 
day. Begin with when you go on watch and tell us what you do 
when you get through. 

Mr. Conway. Do you want 24 hours of it? 

Mr. Free. Yes. 

Mr. Conway. All right. I will take the steamer 0. <& B. I come 
on watch at a quarter after 6 in the morning. I go down there with 
the other five firemen. We clean about two fires apiece. We do 
not clean all the fires at one time. I will clean two, and when I 
have got my two cleaned the next fellow maybe will start, and maybe 
two of us will be cleaning fires at one time, because, with the opening 
of doors and cold drafts going into the boilers, and the use of steam, 
you can not do it all at once, that is all. So we clean fires. We 
may clean perhaps the fires on that four hours’ watch. The cleaning 
of a fire, as I explained—I do not know whether you were in here 
before- 



330 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Free. I know how they are cleaned. 

Mr. Conway. You take a furnace and you shovel it to one side and 
you pull all the charred clinkers out, and then you shove it over, 
put the coal in, and take the other side out. We will clean a fire in 
about 35 minutes. We clean half the fires and steam for all the 
auxiliary machinery. That is four hours gone. 

Then the next watch goes on, and they clean the other half of the 
fires, and keep steam. That accounts for eight hours. 

Then the next watch comes on and they blow such flues as is 
necessary to blow, and take the boat out. They take the vessel out 
on the lake, start to take her out, and then the watch that was on 
from 6 o’clock in the morning comes on again. That is four on and 
eight off. Then you are out on the lake. Then you are continually 
firing and hooking and half-soling-fires. When you shovel coal into 
a furnace, it does not always burn. The shoveling of 2,800 pounds 
of coal is not a hard job, but on certain boats with certain kinds of 
coal, the burning of 2,800 pounds of coal is a mighty hard job. 

Mr. Free. Can you clean a fire at sea? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; we clean some fires at sea. We clean fires 
at sea, because generally a man has three furnaces on one of those 
boats. 

Mr. Mills. Do you blow flues at sea ? 

Mr. Conway. Sometimes. 

Mr. Mills. Very frequently, do you not? 

Mr. Conway. We blow flues with patent flue blowers, and we blow 
them with hand at sea. 

Mr. Mills. Do you have mechanical flue blowers on board the 
ships ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. How many of the ships ? 

Mr. Conway. They have them on most of them. 

Mr. Mills. If they had mechanical flue blowers, it would not take 
as long to blow the flues, would it? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; I think it would. Mechanical flue blowers do 
not blow flues good. 

Mr. Mills. It would take as long with a mechanical flue blower 
as it would if you did not have one ? 

Mr. Conway. No ; with mechanical flue blowers you can blow very 
shortly, but you blow by hand. 

Mr. Mills. It takes how long to blow a flue ? 

Mr. Conway. By hand ? 

Mr. Mills. No; mechanically? 

Mr. Conway. You can blow flues mechanically in 15 or 20 minutes. 

Mr. Mills. When you said that it took three hours to blow the 
flues, was you thinking of blowing them by hand ? 

Mr. Conway. Blowing by hand. 

Mr. Mills. Most vessels have mechanical blowers, do they not ? 

Mr. Conway. And hand blowers, too. 

Mr. Mills. We would have to reduce that 5-hour estimate some¬ 
what considerably if you had mechanical flue blowers ? 

Mr. Conway. No, sir. 

Mr. Mills. If the flues were blown at sea you would have to reduce 
that estimate? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 331 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. In some of these ports you have some local regulations? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. So you have to blow at sea? 

Mr. Conway. No; we generally blow in port. 

Mr. Mills. But where it is forbidden by the local ordinances what 
do you do ? 

Mr. Conway. There is not any local ordinance on the lake which 
says that you can not blow flues. I know of smoke ordinances. 

Mr. Mills. But if such an ordinance did exist you would have to 
blow your flues at sea ? 

Mr. Conway. It would have a tendency to do that; yes. 

Mr. Mills. So it would reduce the amount of work to be done in 
the harbor? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; if the flues were blown outside, but I do not 
think those boats steam that way. Passenger boats run on schedule 
like passenger trains. Steam has got to be there, and if it is not the 
boats do not run on schedule, and if the boats do not run on schedule 
they do not get many passengers and the company does not want to 
get the reputation of coming in one or two or three hours late. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. On a small boat like the steamer Kirby what 
do the firemen do in the 24 hours ? 

Mr. Conway. The steamer Kirby , I think, ran from Detroit- 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. From Sandusky to Put in Bay. 

Mr. Conway. We will take one of Mr. Bielman’s boats. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I am speaking about- 

Mr. Conway. They are on approximately the same run. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. No; I am speaking about a little boat like the 
steamer Kirby , where they are required, as I understand it under 
this law, to have three shifts running between Sandusky and Put in 
Bay. I think Mr. Austin testified to it. 

Mr. Conway. Mr. Bielman has a boat practically the same, iden¬ 
tically the same, as the steamer Kirby; is it not, Mr. Bielman? Is 
not your boat practically the same ? 

Mr. Bielman. One is just about the same as the other. 

Mr. Conway. That boat is running from Detroit to Toledo. It 
starts running from Detroit to Toledo, I think, at 8 o’clock in the 
morning, or half-past 8 or 9 o’clock in the morning, gets over into 
Toledo about 2 o’clock, and comes back to Detroit about 7 o’clock 
at night, and then takes the moonlight out at 8 o’clock in the evening. 

Mr. Dustin. We do not take any moonlight. 

Mr. Conway. The boats running between Toledo and Detroit 
carry a moonlight. 

Mr. Dustin. You are not citing a parallel case. They jare both 
bigger boats than the Kir-by. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I am talking about the boat from Sandusky to 
Put in Bay. 

Mr. Dustin. She does not carry any moonlight. 

Mr. Jefferis. What is a moonlight? 

Mr. Dustin. A moonlight is an excursion. The boats are in the 
excursion business, and we take these people out for a moonlight 
dance. We have dance floors on our boats, and the people come 
down and go out and dance on the water in the evening. 


332 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. You do not know anything about the Kirby? 

Mr. Conway. No; I have been asked the reason why the Kirby 
is laid up, and I have been informed that her boilers are in very 
bad shape. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. But you have heard the testimony that the traffic 
was there to be handled between Sandusky, Lakeside, Put-in-Bay,. 
and the island ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Is it not reasonable to suppose that if the traffic 
was there they would get another boat, if she were laid up on account 
of her boilers ? 

Mr. Conway. If the traffic was there I think Mr. Bielman would 
run the boat. 

Mr. Beilman. We do not run to Put-in-Bay. That boat has been 
taken off. 

Mr. Conway. You run to Sandusky? 

Mr. Beilman. No. 

Mr. Conway. To Toledo, I mean. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. The boat was laid up last year, and it is now, 
according to the testimony ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. And the people are clamoring for the service. 

Mr. Conway. They could not run her unless she had considerable 
boiler repair. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. They could not run because it was not profitable. 

Mr. Conway. It is, if there is business enough. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Why do you lay it to the rumor about the engines 
being condemned? 

Mr. Conway. Because the business is not sufficient to enable them 
to run, and they do not want to invest the amount of money that 
would be necessary to repair the boilers. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. How much would be necessary to repair the 
boilers ? 

Mr. Conway. I was told by Mr. Dustin’s brother that it would cost 
$35,000 to repair the boilers, and seeing that before the seamen’s law 
they never made money, but they lost money, I do not think they 
would put $35,000 more into it and lose that too. But they lost money 
before the seamen’s law went into effect. 

Mr. Briggs. How are these men paid on these vessels? Are they 
paid by the hour, or how are they paid ? 

Mr. Conway. They are paid per day, but the wages are reckoned 
per month. They get paid for every day they are there, but the rates 
are reckoned on all those boats, as the men have testified here—the 
wages are $125 a month for experienced men. A coal passer gets 
$87.60. 

Mr. Briggs. If they run 4 hours on a vessel, taking a short run, do 
they then have 4, 6, or 8 hours, go around and get another job and 
earn as much as they please out of it, if they get that in time to get 
on the boat again and run 4 hours and pick up that money? 

Mr. Conway. No ; they do not get much time. 

Mr. Briggs. I am asking this seriously now. Is this constant 
employment? 

Mr. Conway. No, sir. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 333 

Mr. Briggs. I mean you are employed by the month? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Is this constant employment? 

Mr. Conway. Yes; as long as we are there. 

Mr. Briggs. As long as you are there ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. It is regular employment ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It is not desultory employment. In other words, you 
are there subject to call for these duties you described on certain 
vessels ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. It has not been clear to me from the testimony given 
here, particularly to the short runs. I understood from some of the 
testimony that a boat might run on a very short run, two or three 
hours from one point to another, and two or three hours back, and it 
did not take very long for that sort of thing, and yet they have had 
a very large expense entailed by a large number of excess men on 
the crew. I wish you would explain that a little bit. 

Mr. Conway. Now, we will take a shorter run than that; we will 
take a 55-minute run. Take the Crystal Beach boat. The amount 
of men that the seamen’s law put on that vessel was one—one extra 
oiler. 

Mr. Briggs. What vessel is this you are talking about? 

Mr. Conway. The Americana and the Canadiana , two of them. 

Mr. Hardy. That is a 55-minute run ? 

Mr. Conway. That is a 55--minute run. 

Mr. Briggs. Just describe the operations of those men. After the 
55-minutes go by and they land in port, do those men have nothing 
to do but to get otf the boat and wait for the next boat to leave in 
the evening or for the other run of 55 minutes back ? 

Mr. Conway. No; they are always there on watch. If they are on 
the 4 to 8 watch, they are there from 4 to 8, and if they are not there 
some other men will be put in their place and they are fired. Those 
boats work three hours on and six hours off. Those boats come in and 
tie up at midnight, and then from 12 to 3 blow flues, and the man from 
3 to 6 cleans fires, and the man that comes on at 6 takes the boat to 
Crystal Beach at 6.15. She leaves at 6.15 and arrives at Crystal Beach 
about 7.10 or 7.05. She leaves Crystal Beach and takes the people 
that work in the city of Buffalo back from Crystal Beach. They go 
over there in the evening and stay there. They have homes there or 
board there, and the vessel takes them back to Buffalo, and she arrives 
in Buffalo about 8 o’clock. She stays in Buffalo until 10 o’clock. 
Then she goes out at 10 o’clock and arrives at Crystal Beach at 
11, stays there 5 or 10 minutes, and then comes back and goes 
to the dock somewhere around 12.30. She leaves the dock at 2.15 
and gets over there about 3, stays there 10 or 15 minutes and 
comes back again, and she is in Buffalo around half-past 6, and 
then she goes out at 8.15, and then the next trip is 10.30, and she 
gets back in Buffalo after midnight. 

Mr. Briggs. Does she run day and night? 

Mr. Conway. Until after midnight. 

Mr. Jefferis. How many trips does she make from 6 o’clock in the 
morning until midnight ? 


334 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Conway. About five trips. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean five round trips? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. That is about 10 hours. 

Mr. Briggs. You have been serving on the Lakes some time, have 
you not? 

Mr. Conway. Until I got working for the organization. 

Mr. Briggs. How many years have you been on the Lakes, prac¬ 
tically ? 

Mr. Conway. I started on the Lakes about 1901. 

Mr. Briggs. When did you go with this organization ? 

Mr. Conway. I went with this organization in 1909. I was six 
years on one boat. 

Mr. Briggs. Your service has been on the Great Lakes prior to the 
operation of the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. During that time were there always plenty of cargo 
ships running at a profit, the small ones and big ones, making money 
or losing money, or what were the conditions ? 

Mr. Conway. At different seasons there were hard times. Some¬ 
times we did not get out until June. I think it was in 1904 that the 
ships did not get out until the latter part of June. 

Mr. Briggs. Why? 

Mr. Conway. The boats were tied up. 

Mr. Briggs. Why? 

Mr. Conway. For lack of business, lack of cargo. 

Mr. Briggs. Well, what was the other conditions? Were many 
ships tied up during your term of service, between 1901 and 1909, 
on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Conway. At different times a great many ships, as high as 
35 or 40 different ships were tied up. 

Mr. Briggs. As many or less since the operation of the seamen’s 
act in 1915? 

Mr. Conway. There were just as many ships tied up before as 
there are now; in fact, more than last and the year before. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the cause of all those ships being tied up ? 

Mr. Conway. Lack of business. 

Mr. Scott. What passenger ships were tied up ? 

Mr. Conway. No passenger ships are ever tied up that are profit¬ 
able to run. 

Mr. Scott. They are tied up now, are they not ? 

Mr. Conway. What ones? 

Mr. Scott. Two of the C. & B. boats. 

Mr. Conway. Two of the C. & B. boats. But the seamen’s law is 
not responsible for it. As far as section 2 of the seamen’s law is con¬ 
cerned, that is not responsible for tying up the boats, because the 
most that the seamen’s law could compel them to put on those boats 
was two men—a water tender and an oiler. 

Mr. Briggs. How much of an expense would the oiler and water 
tender amount to ? 

Mr. Conway. This year the wage question is not settled yet. 

Mr. Briggs. How much has it been? I am not talking about the 
future. 

Mr. Conway. Last year it was $250 a month. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 335 

Mr. Briggs. For the two men? 

Mr. Conway. For the two men. 

Mr. Briggs. $125 apiece? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. There would be $3,000 expense entailed in that matter? 

Mr. Conway. They run only a short time. 

Mr. Briggs. How long do they run ? 

Mr. Conway. They have been running from the 15th of May, I 
think. I just do not know how long those boats do run, and I do 
not want to say anything, Mr. Congressman, that I am not sure of. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you not give an estimate of how long they run? 
Mr. Scott, how long are those boats accustomed to run ? 

Mr. Scott. About four months. 

Mr. Briggs. That is about $1,000 in added expense. 

Mr. Scott. What boats are you talking about ? 

Mr. Conway. The City of Alpena , and the other boat is laid up. 

Mr. Scott. Yes, those boats run up the Lakes for about four 
months. 

Mr. Briggs. Those are the ones I am talking about, and I was 
just trying to find out the extra expense. You do not know how 
much those vessels lost on their operations, all told, last year, do 
you? 

Mr. Conavay. I have been told they lost $50,000. 

Mr. Briggs. $1,000 I think, was the extra expense for crew-? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. $1,000 on one ship and $1,000 on the other ? 

Mr. Conway. I was told that by an officer of the company. 

Mr. Briggs. I think Mr. Scott is correct about $1,000 on each ship. 

Mr. Scott. I thought he said two. 

Mr. Briggs. Two extra men on each ship ? 

Mr. Scott. How much does it cost to fee them ? 

Mr. Conavay. I do not think, with a large crew, that the carrying 
cost of these two men would figure. I think what those two men ate, 
considering the large number of the crew- 

Mr. Briggs. They figure on something a day to feed a man, do 
they not? 

Mr. Conavay. They figure approximately $1 a day, but I figured 
that that would not be any appreciable loss in $50,000. 

Mr. Briggs. At any rate, that would be, for four months, about 
$250 more for each vessel. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. $2,500. 

Mr. Conavay. $250 for two vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; about that—about $2,250. 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you knoAV of any other expense by reason of the 
seamen’s act that those vessels incurred ? 

Mr. Conavay. No. Mr. Shontz told me—I want to be fair- 

Mr. Briggs. Who is Mr. Shontz? 

Mr. Conway. He is the manager of those two boats. 

Mr. Briggs, All right. 

Mr. Conway. That the shortening of the season figured m there. 
He told me they lost $50,000 last year. 


336 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. The shortening of the season? 

Mr. Conway. Figured in. 

Mr. Briggs. That is the season between what dates? Is it the 
15th day of May ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. And September 15 ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Those ships used to run seven months. 

Mr. Conway. And they used to make two trips a week. Last 
year they made three trips a week. They cut out Toledo and Rog¬ 
ers City because they were unprofitable, and they made three trips 
a week. 

Mr. Scott. They put on an extra boat? 

Mr. Conway. No. 

Mr. Scott. They put on a boat that did not stop at any point at 
all, but just ran down the lake from Mackinaw right through to 
Detroit ? 

Mr. Conway. But in that boat they made six trips a week. They 
were making three trips each week. 

Mr. Scott. And that was a relief to our trade, that extra boat? 

Mr. Conway. But they did not stop at your place. 

Mr. Scott. The extra boat did not stop ? 

Mr. Conway. No ; she did not stop at your place at all, but these 
other- two boats, although they cut out Rogers City and Toledo and 
made thre trips instead of two, they found it unprofitable then on 
account of the lack of business. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you in that connection, Are those 
boats passenger or freight-package vessels ? 

Mr. Conway. They are oombination vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. Carrying freight and passengers? 

Mr. Conway. Package freight. 

Mr. Briggs. And they carry passengers also ? 

Mr. Conway. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. You know nothing about the sand boats and the 
operation of those ? 

Mr. Conway. No. 

STATEMENT OF MR. K. B. NOLAN, SECRETARY OF THE SAILORS’ 
UNION OF THE GREAT LAKES. 

Mr. Nolan. I might make this explanation that I am not accus¬ 
tomed to making any speeches or statements. I will make a short, 
preliminary statement, and then be glad to answer any questions as 
can be asked. 

The first thing that I want to bring out before this committee is 
this, that the inference has been given here that a large number of 
boats on the Great Lakes have been changed from American to 
Canadian registry, leaving the inference that the Canadian mer¬ 
chant marine has been increased and the American merchant marine 
on the Lakes decreased. I want to show you that is false. Thinking 
that statement might be true, I wrote a letter to the Department of 
Merchant Marine and Fisheries, in Canada, asking for the total ton¬ 
nage—that is, Canadian merchant tonnage—on the Great Lakes in the 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 337 


year 1914, which is the year before the seamen’s law was passed, and 
asked for their total tonnage in 1920. I received the following reply: 

Department of Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

Ottawa, April 9, 1921. 

Sni: Your letter of the 2d instant addressed to the minister of labor lias 
been referred to this department, and I beg to inform you that the Canadian 
Merchant Marine on the Great Lakes in 1914 comprised 2,100 vessels, sail and 
steam, total net tonnage 314,660; in 1920, 498 sailing vessels, net tonnage 94,278; 
1,295 steamers, net tonnage 219,597; total net tonnage, 313,875. 

I am, sir, your obedient servant, 

A. Johnston, Deputy Minister. 

Mr. Chindblom. Does that statement show how many ships were 
transferred from American to Canadian registry ? 

Mr. Nolan. No; I did not ask them. I asked for the total tonnage 
in 1914, and their tonnage in 1920. I asked for the Canadian tonnage 
on the Great Lakes in 1914 and in 1920, and that is his answer. Ac¬ 
cording to these figures there was a very slight decrease, 785 net tons, 
in the Canadian merchant marine. 

I have here the annual report of the Commissioner of Navigation 
to the Secretary of Commerce. 

Mr. Briggs. What year ? 

Mr. Nolan. 1920. In that there is a table on page 211, giving the 
tonnage on the Great Lakes, the number and gross tonnage of sailing 
vessels, steam vessels, canal boats and barges documented on the 
northern lakes in specified years from 1868 to 1920. In that table, 
comparing the same years, in 1914 the tonnage on the Lakes was 
2,882,892. 

Mr. Briggs. Gross or net tons ? 

Mr. Nolan. That is all gross tons. The amount of that that was 
steamboat tonnage was 2,523,517. That was in 1914. 

In 1920 there was quite a big increase. I will explain how that 
came about. It was not as big as it looks here. The steamboat ton¬ 
nage was increased to 2,856,555. That is an increase of 378,897 tons. 
Now, then, that is misleading information to men that do not know the 
actual situation. It shows an increase there of 378,897, but in that in¬ 
crease there were quite a few boats that were built for salt water trade, 
and documented on the Lakes, but not intended for trade on the 
Great Lakes. 

Mr. Chindblom. You did not give the gross tonnage at all yet. 
You only gave the steam tonnage. 

Mr. Nolan. The reason for that is that I want to subtract from 
that steam tonnage the amount that was built on the Lakes, for salt¬ 
water service, and did not get into the merchant marine on the Lakes 
at all. 

On page 30, in the same book, is a summary of types of ships of 
1,000 gross tons built. That means all over the country. It says 
practically all of this tonnage was built for salt water, and nearly 
all of it for foreign trade. According to the place built and type 
of vessel, the ships above named may be thus summarized. It gives 
the tonnage built on the seaboard, but we are only interested in 
the Great Lakes. There were 145 boats built on the Lakes, with a total 
gross tonnage of 378,897. The increase was only 368,610 tons, leaving 
an apparent decrease of American tonnage on the Lakes of 10,287 
tons. But included in the tonnage that we presumed went to the 

48420—21-22 


338 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

coast—it says practically all of it did—there are two boats that 1 
know of that were built for Great Lake traffic. They were 600-foot 
boats, carrying from 12,000 to 13,000 tons of freight. Of course, a 
boat is never documented for the amount of freight it carries, and 
I presume they would be documented for about 7,000 or 8,000 ton 
ships, so that out of the tonnage built on the Great Lakes presumably 
for salt water would come at least 15,000 dead tons that were built 
for lake trade, purely lake boats, that could not go on salt water 
if they wanted to, which leaves a slight increase in the lake tonnage 
of about 5,000 tons, and possibly more. 

I am only citing this to give you the facts in the matter. You have 
been given the impression that Canadian merchant marine is in¬ 
creasing, and the American merchant marine decreasing, and I am 
giving you these figures to show that is not the case. There was a 
slight decrease in the Canadian merchant marine, and a slight 
increase in the American merchant marine on the Lakes. Mr. 
Thorp states that 11 boats out of 60 have been withdrawn. Lie also 
stated that 4 of these were commandeered during the war. The 
only boats that I ever heard of, until this agitation started in 
Detroit a month ago, about the seamen’s law, or having it amended, 
that had been withdrawn was the steamer Kirby. The Kirby could 
not run if they wanted to run her until they got her repaired. Ac¬ 
cording to Mr. Dustin’s statement here, as I got his testimony, the 
boat had not been paying for a few years before the passage of the 
seaman’s law; in other words, after they took the bar out of it, is 
my impression. I do not know whether I am absolutely correct or 
not. In 1915 he testified he lost $30, I believe it was. So that the 
seamen’s law did not affect her that year, as it did not go into opera¬ 
tion until November 4. 

The two upshore boats of the D. & C. Line ran last year, but the 
company has notified the public that they are not going to operate 
them this year. I have been told that there are four boats around 
Put in Bay, or North Bass Island, or some place, that they are not 
going to operate. I never heard of the boat until I came here, and 
did not know they were destroyed, in fact. According to the testi¬ 
mony that was given here there were about 500 people on Put in Bay 
Island, and the mayor or somebody there testified they had to have 
eight boats to serve those people. Well, that is about one boat to 
every 60 people. I can not see where that is necessary. We only have 
about 30 or 35 passenger boats out of Detroit, and there are over a 
million people there. He says he still has four boats running down 
there. There are four that are not running, so there must be four 
that are still running. 

I gathered from the testimony here that there are a couple more 
little boats up around Mackinaw Island that are not going to run 
this year. I wish to make this statement, that those four boats on 
Lake Erie and the two boats on Mackinaw Island, and the two up¬ 
shore boats of the D. & C. Line, the steamer Kirby , and all of the 
combined tonnage, would not equal the tonnage of the last passenger 
boat that was built on the lakes in 1912, all of them put together, 
the total tonnage of all of these boats that have been named, that are 
going to lay up. Mr. Thorp made the statement that 11 boats out of 
60 have been withdrawn. That would leave the impression that one- 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 339 

sixth of the tonnage has been withdrawn, but probably a more ac¬ 
curate estimate would be less than 5 per cent. 

The officers are paid for 10 months in the year. I might explain to 
you gentlemen that the licensed officers are not mentioned in the sea¬ 
men’s bill at all. The law has nothing whatever to do with them. 
That is the seamen’s law. The navigation laws enacted some years 
ago specified that they had to obtain a certificate of efficiency from 
the Department of Commerce; that is their license, a captain’s or 
engineer’s license, and, I presume, they are men who do not want to 
work at anything else when they are working at sailing and steam¬ 
boating, and that on the short-season boats they have seen fit in 
their organizations to insist on getting a full season’s pay, whether 
they ran four months or eight months. I do not know anything 
about it. Our organization has nothing to do with it. The seamen’s 
law did not mention them in it. We are not affiliated with them in 
any way. We have never acted jointly with them in any wage con¬ 
troversy, and never assisted them in any way that I ever knew of, 
and they never assisted us, and I can not understand how the sailors’ 
union, or the marine firemen’s union, or the marine cooks’ and stew¬ 
ards’ unions could assist them in any way in getting such a contract. 

It is stated that there are 365 boats in the Lake Carriers’ Associa¬ 
tion. Those are the bulk freighters, and we were told there were 
365 boats in that combination, and that they were not all in commis¬ 
sion when the question was asked. I wish to state that there is not 
15 per cent of them in commission. It is not true that they could 
not be in commission. It is because there is nothing for them to 
carry. There are a great many of the passenger ships on the lakes, 
whose owners are represented down here, that only run six or eight 
weeks in the year, in the summer season, and the seamen’s law 
allows them to run from May 15 to September 15. They are 
allowed to run with 50 per cent life-saving equipment during that 
period. They do not do that, the majority of them. They only 
operate from May 1 to about September 1, from Decoration Day to 
Labor Day. 

Mr. Briggs. From May 1? 

Mr. Nolan. From June 1 —from Labor Day, rather-—to Labor 
Day. They do not even take advantage of the full limit of the 
law, as it is, and I feel safe in saying that outside of what passengers 
they carried on passenger ferries that operate between Toledo and 
Windson, Port Huron and Sarnia, 95 per cent of the passengers on 
the lake are carried between Decoration Day and Labor Day. 

The question was asked here as to whether there was any demand 
on the part of the public for proper life-saving equipment. This 
proposed amendment intends to cut down the amount of life-saving 
equipment that is now specified by the seaman’s law. In some in¬ 
stances it cuts in two, over the present requirements. I do not be¬ 
lieve that the inference that you gentlemen were given here that 
there is no demand on the part of the public for proper life-saving 
equipment is correct. The public sometimes sleeps and is only 
aroused in time of a great disaster. I did not clip them out, but 
there is a mass of clippings in my desk in Chicago, of editorials 
from different newspapers about the time of the Titanic disaster. 
I took four of them from four different newspapers and brought 


340 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

them down here to show this committee that the public does want 
life-saving equipment. I want to read them into the record, if you 
please. 

(Whereupon, the committee adjourned until Friday, May 6, 1921, 
at 10 o’clock a. m.) 


Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Washing ton, D. C., Friday , May 6 , 1921. 

The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. William S. Greene 
(chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF MR. K. B. NOLAN—Resumed. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you intend to discuss before the committee the 
percentages of the nationalities of the various seamen who are in 
this service ? 

Mr. Nolan. I did not intend to. 

Mr. Briggs. You have no figures on that? 

Mr. Nolan. I have no figures. Mr. Furuseth has figures on that. 

Mr. Briggs. The figures that you read from here yesterday with 
reference to the tonnage on the Great Lakes were those that you took 
from the report of the Commissioner of Navigation of the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce for 1920? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Those figures were all official, were they? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir; for the fiscal year ending June 30. 1920. 

Mr. Briggs. It is the so-called 1920 report ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. As I understand your statement, those figures show 
that there had been really an increase of tonnage on the Lakes ? 

Mr. Nolan. Steamboat tonnage. There has been a decrease in 
canal boats. I presume they mean canal boats also have to be docu¬ 
mented with the department. There has been a large decrease with 
them; I suppose it is due to the Erie Canal. There lias been a large 
decrease in motor boats; that is, pleasure boats; they all have to be 
documented, too. But there has been an increase in steamboats. 

Mr. Briggs. That is all. The witness may go ahead with his state¬ 
ment. 

Mr. Scott. Has there been an increase in the passenger boats? 
This discussion has been directed at the short passenger runs. Has 
there been an increase in the passenger boats since 1914? 

Mr. Nolan. I can not get any official figures on that, Mr. Con¬ 
gressman. 

Mr. Scott. It is reasonable to assume that the fellows who are en¬ 
gaged in the passenger service would know that they had increased 
the number of their ships. 

Mr. Nolan. I tried to bring out the point yesterday that the boats 
enumerated here were either withdrawn or going to be withdrawn; 
that the total combined tonnage of them would not equal the ton¬ 
nage of the last boat.that w T as built. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 341 

Mr. Scott. You are not attempting by that testimony and those 
figures to show the amount of tonnage in operation, but simply the 
amount of tonnage available. Is that right ? 

Mr. Nolan. The amount of tonnage documented. For instance, 
the steamer Kirby that is not going to be run this year will not be 
inspected and documented, consequently that total would not be in¬ 
cluded in that table of figures. 

Mr. Chindblom. You have no figures showing what American 
vessels or what vessels have been withdrawn from American regis¬ 
try and placed under Canadian registry, have you! 

Mr. Nolan. Mr. Congressman, I have not. I do not know where 
to get those figures. I will give some thought to that subject and 
try to get them. 

Mr. Chindblom. You do not claim that the figures you gave us 
yesterday showing the total documented tonnage under American 
and Canadian registry prove anything in regard to the change of 
registry from one country to the other? 

Mr. Nolan. No; not ait all; but it proves that the Canadian mer¬ 
chant marine is not increasing—that the Canadian merchant marine 
is decreasing. 

Mr. Chindblom. It might be due to the fact that they are not 
building boats there, or it might be due to the fact that the Canadian 
or British Government has taken boats from the Canadian service 
and placed them with the ocean service, might it not? 

Mr. Nolan. It might, but the war has been over for two years. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is a question of fact. You can not reason it 
out. 

Mr. Nolan. There was a large number of lake vessels—American 
lake vessels—that were commandeered during the war. 

Mr. Chindblom. Certainly. 

Mr. Nolan. I assume the average to be about the same. 

Mr. Chindblom. I would not assume that. It is a question of fact. 
Let us not assume or imagine; if we can get the figures, let us have 
the figures. 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know where to get the figures. All I know 
is that the Canadian Government commandeered the ships and took 
them to salt water, through Canada, Canadian boats, and the Ameri¬ 
can Government did the same thing. They were withdrawn from 
both sides for salt-water service. 

Mr. Briggs. I presume the Department of Commerce may be able to 
give us some figures on that subject. 

Mr. Nolan. I might make this assertion. This is personal knowl¬ 
edge and belief. It has always been the custom on the Lakes that 
the boats taken over are sold and the Canadian boats were old boats 
that had outworn their usefulness on the American side, and the 
great majority of those boats were boats that Mr. Scott condemned 
as worn-out hulks in describing a steamboat that went down; they 
were to my knowledge never used in the same trade that they had 
been previously used in. They are boats that had been trading 
between Canadian ports carrying pulp wood to the American ports, 
which had been sold to Canadian parties. They were not fitted for 
the trade. They were built and they were bought by the Canadians 
for their own trade. 


342 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 


Mr. Briggs. That was in the case of the Hall Transportation Co. 
fleet of 24 steamers. 

Mr. Scott. On Lake Ontario. 

Mr. Nolan. Our organization does not extend on to Lake Ontario. 
I have never seen a Hall steamboat. I am familiar with Lake Michi¬ 
gan, Lake Erie, Lake Huron, and Lake Superior. I am totally 
ignorant of conditions on Lake Ontario and have never been on that 
lake in my life and never saw it. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know whether or not railroad competition 
would have a great deal to do with the traffic on Lake Ontario par¬ 
ticularly? There is a great deal of railroad competition there, is 
there not? 

Mr. Nolan. On Lake Ontario ? 

Mr. Hardy. Yes. That is in New York, is it not? 

Mr. Nolan. That is in New York State, I really do not know— 
I say, I have never lived there or seen Lake Ontario, and I do not 
know. 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask you this question. How much actual 
steam service or lake service have you had on the lakes ? 

Mr. Nolan. I started to sail in 1905. I sailed until 1916, until I 
first took the office with the Sailors’ Union. Since then I have 


been- 

Mr. Briggs (interposing). What kind of vessels did you sail on? 

Mr. Nolan. Freight boats, coal. 

Mr. Briggs. No passenger boats? 

Mr. Nolan. No. 

Mr. Briggs. What vessels were you on ? 

Mr. Nolan. The names? 

Mr. Briggs. The names, if you can recall them. 

Mr. Nolan. I was on the steamer George Peavey. 

Mr. Briggs. Plying between what ports ? 

Mr. Nolan. Buffalo to Duluth. I do not mean from Buffalo. 
I shipped from Buffalo and made the trip to Duluth. The boats 
were freighters and had no regular ports to sail from. In fact, you 
did not know when loading a cargo on Lake Superior and you do "not 
get the orders for your final destination until you pass Detroit, and 
you do not know where you are going. You go from Duluth all the 
way down the lakes to Detroit before you are told where you are 
going. Then you may go to any one of a dozen ports on Lake 
Erie and a good many times you never go twice in succession to -the 
same ports. You go back to your port later. 

Mr. Briggs. Go ahead with your statement and I will ask you 
questions along those lines later on when you get through with your 
consecutive statement. 

Mr. Nolan. I make this explanation, that I have never made a 
speech in my life or been before a committee or been cross-examined 
by lawyers in court. It is my first experience along this line and it 
is impossible for me to get any connected statement. 

Mr. Briggs. What the committee wants to know is the fact, and 
how this bill is going to affect the situation, as far as you can judge, 
and the questions that will be asked you are to develop information 
for the committee. 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 343 

Mr. Nolan. The impression that I have gathered from a great deal 
of the testimony stated by previous witnesses the first two days, 
especially, of this hearing, is that there has not been and that there 
is no danger on the lakes, that there is not very much danger in sailing 
on the lakes. I did not know that that impression would be given out 
here and I have not many figures of the number of vessels lost, but 
I have in a hearing in this connection that I happen to have with me. 

Mr. Briggs. Just designate what it is. 

Mr. Nolan. It is a communication, a letter written by Mr. V. A. 
Olander, who was at that time secretary of the sailors’ union on 
the Great Lakes, addressed to the Hon. William C. Redfield, at that 
time Secretary of Commerce. 

Mr. Briggs. Give the date of the letter. 

Mr. Nolan. December 19, 1914. 

Mr. Chindblom. Has Mr. Olander any official position now with 
the union? 

Mr. Nolan. He has no official position with the sailors’ union on 
the Great Lakes. He is still second vice president of our Inter¬ 
national Seamen’s Union. I would like to make this explanation to 
clear that in your minds. The international union does not mean an 
organization from one nation with another. The term international 
means the number of locals in the United States combined in a 
sort of international organization, within the country. I take that 
back. It includes the United States and Canada, all the different 
unions in the United States and Canada in similar lines. It is a 
sold of holding company paying a small per capita tax into what 
they know as an international union. They have no connection with 
any other foreign countries. 

Sir. Scott. The British? 

Mr. Nolan. No connection at all. The International Seamen’s 
Union is not composed of any organizations outside of the America** 
union and one Canadian union, the sailors, firemen and cooks’ uni<»‘ 
of Canada. 

Mr. Scott. Is not an effort being made to get the British, the Nor¬ 
wegians, and the Japanese into it? 

Mr. Nolan. The International Seamen’s? No, sir. 

Mr. Furuseth. That is a mistake. This gentlemen does not 
know these things, and if you will ask me those questions you will 
get the truth. 

Mr. Briggs. The committee has the right to ask this witness. If 
he does not know all he has to say is that he does not know. 

Mr. Nolan. I will give you my impression of what the usual 
expression international means, and that is it means only the local 
unions of this country and Canada. 

Mr. Briggs. Referring to this letter that you have mentioned, is 
it published in hearings ? 

Mr. Nolan. No, sir; that is not a hearing; it is just a letter written 
by Mr. Olander and published. 

"Mr. Briggs. Proceed. 

Mr. Nolan. He speaks of the Great Lakes since 1905, in that 
period. The letter was written in 1914, and in that year there were 
,31 vessels lost. ^ 


344 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. That was before the seamen’s act ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir; 31 vessels have been lost with every person 
on board. That is not the total number lost. That is the number 
lost—everybody on board with all hands. 

Mr. Scott. Does it give the name of the vessels ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir; foundered with all hands. The names of 
the vessels are as follows- 

Mr. Bankhead. Just incorporate the letter in the record. 

Mr. Nolan. The steamer Iosco , the steamer KaMyuga, , the steamer 
Ira H. Owen - 

Mr. Chindblom. Does it state where the vessels were lost? 

Mr. Nolan. Lost between 1905 and 1914. 

Mr. Scott. At what time of the year ? 

Mr. Nolan. This letter does not give that. It gives the names of 
the vessels lost in that period from 1905 to the date that the letter was 
written. Continuing, the names of the vessels are as follows: 

Schooner Tasmania, schooner Olive Jeanette, steamer J. H. Jones, steamer 
Arcadia, steamer Searchlight (fishing vessel), steamer D. M. Clemson, schooner 
George Nestor , steamer Geo. A. Floss (fishing vessel), steamer Marquette & 
Bessemer No. 2, schooner Rouse Simmons, steamer Silver Spray (fishing vessel), 
steamer Adella Shores, steamer Henry B. Smith, steamer Isaac M. Scott, steamer 
John A. McGean, steamer Charles S. Price, steamer Argus, steamer Hydrus, 
steamer Regina, steamer Leafield, steamer Wexford, steamer James Carruthers, 
schooner Plymouth, lightship 82, steamer Benjamin Noble, steamer C. F. Curtis, 
barge Annie M. Peterson, and barge Selden E. Marvin. 

The four last named were lost during the present year, and the Noble in April, 
the Curtis, Marvin, and Peterson in November. All except five in the above list 
were American vessels, the five exceptions being Canadian, and it includes only 
cases where the vessel and its entire crew were lost. There have been many 
other wrecks during the same period, in which part of the crew was lost, such as 
the Cypress, which foundered with her entire crew except one; the Pere Mar¬ 
quette No. 18, the Saonva, the Mataa fa , the Richardson, and many others. These 
cases certainly indicate grave conditions of marine risk, and were of such a 
nature as to warrant the most thorough investigation possible by the Steamboat- 
Inspection Service with a view of determining the causes which brought about 
the losses and to provide safeguards for the future. 

I just wanted this committee to know that so that they will not be 
under the impression that there have never been any wrecks on the 
Lakes and that wrecks do not occur there. 

Mr. Hardy. You want that letter in the record? 

Mr. Bankhead. I should like to have it go in. 

The Chairman. Let it go in. 

(The letter referred to is as follows:) 

(Written across first page: Read this. You may be called upon to back it 
up. Olander.) 

Lake Seamen’s Union, 
Chicago, III., December 19, 1914 • 

Hon. William C. Redfield, 

Secretary of Commerce, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: I inclose herewith a statement covering in detail the assertions I 
have made in letters to you regarding inefficiency of the United States Steam¬ 
boat-Inspection Service. If you can spare the time to read the inclosed docu¬ 
ment I am sure that you will see the necessity for some important changes in 
the methods of the service. 

Respectfully, yours, 


Y. A. Olander, Secretary. 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 345 


Communication to the Secretary of Commerce in Relation to the United 

States Steamboat-Inspection Service. 

By V. A. Olander, Secretary of the Lake Seamen’s Union. 

December 19, 1914. 

To the Secretary of Commerce. 

Dear Sir : I respectfully request your consideration of certain charges, which I 
submit, against the methods of the United States Steamboat-Inspection Service. 
In the following pages I amplify the statements contained in my letter to you 
under date of April 16, 1914, and present such proofs of my assertions as I can 
submit herein, covering also the resolutions afterwards sent to you by the Inter¬ 
national Seamen’s Union of America. I regret that the department will not per¬ 
mit me to see the reply of the Inspection Service to the statements I made in 
the letter referred to above. I am quite sure that a knowledge of the contents 
of that reply would enable me to present a more complete statement, of the case. 

It is not my intention to burden you with mere personal opinions of my own, 
nor to offer an argument on all the various points in which I disagree with the 
methods of the inspectors. I shall refer only to such inefficiencies, neglect, and 
disregard of duty on the part of the officials of the Inspection Service which are 
recognized by seamen generally (particularly by members of the Lake Seamen’s 
Union, whom I have the honor to represent) as being plainly dangerous and to 
which loss of life can be traced. 

I am proceeding on the theory, which I believe is correct, that under the 
law the main duty of the United States Steamboat-Inspection Service is to 
safeguard human life in the navigation of such vessels as are under its jurisdic¬ 
tion. 

On the Great Lakes since 1905 31 vessels have been lost with every person on 
board, foundering with all hands. The names of these vessels are as follows: 

Steamer Iosco, steamer Kaliyuga, steamer Ira, H. Owen, schooner Tasmania, 
schooner Olive Jeanette, steamer J. H. Jones, steamer Arcadia, steamer Search¬ 
light (fishing vessel), steamer I). M. Cle7nson, schooner George Nestor, steamer 
Geo. A. Floss (fishing vessel), steamer Marquette & Bessemer No. 2, schooner 
Rouse Simmons, steamer Silver Spray (fishing vessel), steamer Adella Shores, 
steamer Henry B. Smith, steamer Isaac M. Scott, steamer John A. McGean, 
steamer Charles S. Price, steamer Argus, steamer Hydrus, steamer Regina, 
steamer Lea field, steamer Wexford, steamer James Carruthers, schooner Ply¬ 
mouth, Lightship 82, steamer Benjamin Noble, steamer C. F. Curtis, barge Annie 
M. Peterson, barge Selden E. Marvin. 

The four last named were lost during the present year, the Noble in April, 
the Curtis, Marvin and Peterson in November. All except five in the above 
list were American vessels, the five exceptions being Canadian, and it includes 
only cases where the vessel and its entire crew were lost. There have been 
many other wrecks during the same period, in which part of the crew was 
lost/such as the Cypress, which foundered with her entire crew except one; 
the Pere Marquette No. 18, the Savona, the Mataafa, the Richardson, and many 
others. These cases certainly indicate grave conditions of marine risk, and 
were of such a nature as to warrant the most thorough investigation possible 
by the Steamboat-Inspection Service with a view of determining the causes 
which brought about the losses and to provide safeguards for the future. 

failure to investigate disasters. 

Rule V, Section 16, Rules and Regulations of the Board of Supervising In¬ 
spectors, provides for investigations of accidents to vessels under the juris¬ 
diction of the service, when such accidents have involved loss of life or damage 
to property exceeding $100. The section referred to is based upon Section 
4448, Revised Statutes, and therefore has the purpose of discovering defects 
and imperfections in the “ hull, equipment, boilers and machinery,” as well as 
to ascertain the cause of any accident or injury which the vessel has suffered. 

Section 4406 of the Revised Statutes requires that supervising inspectors, 
within their respective districts, shall instruct local boards of inspectors in the 
proper performance of their duties. 


346 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


I charge that the local and supervising inspectors of the inspection districts 
on the Great Lakes have been derelict in their duties under the above sections. 
In proof of this charge I respectfully submit the following as a specific case: 

During the month of November, 1913, a great number of vessels, nearly all 
being steam vessels, were lost, wrecked, or badly damaged on the Great Lakes. 
About 240 seamen lost their lives as a result of the disasters. The property 
loss amounted to several millions of dollars in value. 

The catastrophe was a result of a heavy gale, combined with weak hatches 
and poorly constructed pilot houses and cabins on the vessels, and the inability 
of many of the steamers to keep out of the trough of the sea, owing to the fact 
that they had no storm sail or other equipment to assist the engines in such 
emergencies. The vessels were notoriously unfit to encounter very bad weather. 
Their greatest weakness was in their hatches, a condition very largely due to 
undermanning. 

Whatever the cause of the disasters, however, I submit that they were suffi¬ 
ciently grave to have warranted a most searching public investigation, for the 
purpose of ascertaining what could and should be done to provide safeguards 
for the future. 

The local inspectors made no investigation whatsoever. Proof of this failure 
to investigate will be found in letters from various inspectors, admitting that 
no investigation was made. I forwarded copies of those letters to you April 
16, 1914. 

When the local inspectors failed to act, the two supervising inspectors in 
charge of the Great Lakes districts should then, in accordance with section 4406, 
R. S., have instructed the local boards “ in the proper performance of their 
duties ” and thus have compelled an investigation of the disasters. They did 
not do so. 

If it was the opinion of the Service, as indicated to me recently, that sep¬ 
arate investigations by each of the local boards would have led to confusion, 
the supervising inspector general should have directed one of the local boards 
to conduct the investigation. The Supervising Inspector General failed to do 
.so, although Sec. 16 of Rule 5, Rules and Regulations of the Board of Super¬ 
vising Inspectors, clearly provides for emergencies of that character. 

Neither the Supervising Inspector General (the official who was acting in that 
capacity at the time or the inspector general himself upon his return from 
Europe) nor the two supervising inspectors made any effort to provide for such 
investigation. 

In letters to me, copies of which I sent to you April 16, 1914, the two super¬ 
vising inspectors referred to indicated that whatever conclusions they had 
reached regarding the disasters were largely the result of apparently pri¬ 
vate discussions with persons interested in shipping on the Great Lakes. It 
"would be good for the Service, I believe, if the light of publicity were turned 
upon those kinds of discussions. At any rate they should not be the sole basis 
for official decisions affecting matters that concern safety of life. 

It appears that no effort was made by any official of tiie Inspection Service, 
except one, to expose the conditions which made the disasters inevitable. The 
one exception noted was the inspector of hulls at Duluth, Minn., who gave a 
statement on the subject to the newspapers. I shall refer to his statement 
again later. 

No real investigation was attempted by the Inspection Service, but under 
date of June 3, 1914, Mr. Thurman, the acting secretary of the department, 
advised me of a supposed investigation, held by the board of supervising in¬ 
spectors during its sessions last winter. I quote Mr. Thurman as follows: 

“ Under the direction of the Secretary of the department, such investigation 
was held by the board of supervising inspectors, the results of which can be 
easily ascertain, * * * ” 

On the same subject, in your letter to Mr. T. A. Hanson, secretary-treasurer 
International Seamen’s Union of America, Chicago, Ill., under date of July Id' 
1914, the following appears: 

It is the fact, howe\ci, that six shipmasters who were exposed to the sanie 
storm, but in a lesser degree, in a different locality, appeared at the inquiry 
before the board of supervising inspectors on this subject and testified as to 
the severity of the gale, stating that their ships were helpless and unmanageable 
during its height and that it was undoubtedly more severe on Lake Huron than 
in the spot where they experienced it.” 

I have not yet succeeded in obtaining any information as to the results of the 
so-called investigations. But the department has kindly, after a great deal of 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


347 


hesitation which I am at a loss to understand, furnished me with the names 
of five or six shipmasters who appeared before the board of supervising in¬ 
spectors. 

The names of these live masters, to which I add the names of the steamers 
they were in charge of, are as follows: 

Capt. H. S. Lyons, steamer G. Russell Hubbard; Capt. R. J. Lyons, steamer 
John B. Cowle; Capt. W. .T. Hunt, steamer Alva C. Dinkey; Capt. Millard Stew¬ 
art, steamer Abraham Steam. 

The five masters whose names appear above were brought to Washington by 
Capt. Denis Sullivan (perhaps Capt. Sullivan’s name completes the list of the 
six masters?), a shipowner and member of the executive committee of the 
Lake Carriers’ Association, to appear before the Committee on Merchant Marine 
and Fisheries of the House of Representatives in opposition to the seamen’s 
bill (S. 136), and, I presume, to appear before the board of supervising in¬ 
spectors. 

The testimony of Capts. H. S. Lyons, W. J. Hunt, and Richard England, before 
the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, was to the effect that their 
ships were neither helpless nor unmanageable during the gale. If they testified 
to the contrary before the board of supervising inspectors, as indicated in your 
letter, an explanation should be demanded of them. They testified before the 
committee on March 6, 1914, and were before the board of supervising inspectors 
very soon after, or possibly just before, that date. The other two masters 
named did not make any detailed statement before the committee. 

The five masters were brought to Washington to argue for and defend the 
shipowners’ s : de of the case. Their ships had not experienced the worst of the 
storm and had not been damaged. They were witnesses selected by the ship¬ 
owners. Yet the Inspection Service appears to have contented itself with their 
testimony. 

I was in Washington during the entire time the board was in session. Mem¬ 
bers of that board knew I was vitally interested in anything that might come 
up regarding the Great Lakes situation, and that I represented some thousands 
of men whose lives depend upon the condition of the ships. They knew, also, 
that in my testimony before the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries I 
had made some .statements relative to the Inspection Service which ought not 
to have gone unchallenged if untrue, and which warranted action on their part. 
I exchanged letters with two members of the board while it was in session, 
concerning conditions on board the ships, and the disasters of November, 1913. 
But I was not informed that the board was hearing testimony on the subject. 

Under the circumstances I can not help believing that the board of supervis¬ 
ing inspectors did not want to hear from anyone except such persons as might 
be selected by the shipowners. Only the board itself and the shipowners appear 
to have known anything about the alleged investigation. 

In your letter to Mr. T. A. Hanson (July 16, 1914) replying to the resolution 
sent to you by the International Seamen’s Union, a letter which was evidently 
based upon the information given you by the Inspection Service, you say: 

“ It has never been determined what the specific cause of the loss of these 
steamers or any of them was, for one reason among others that all hands were 
lost with them and that there was not a witness left.” 

Let me say that out of a total of at least 34 vessels which were lost, wrecked, 
or damaged, during the particular gale referred to, at least 26 were under the 
jurisdiction of the Inspection Service and 6 of these were lost with every per¬ 
son on board. This left at least 20 crews to furnish evidence as to what had 
happened to their ships, a total of nearly 500 witnesses, not one of whom was 
called. These men were on the following-named American steamers: II. M. 
Hanna, Jr., L. C. Waldo, Major, Wm. Nottingham, Northern Queen, J. T. Hutch¬ 
inson, Pontiac, Peter White, D. 0. Mills, J. M. Jenks, J. H. Sheadle, Cornell, 
A. E. Stewart, Centurian, F. G. Hartwell, II. B. II aw good, Geo. G. Crawford, 
Louisiana, Matoa, G. J. G rammer P 

Section 16 of Rule Y, and section 4448 R. S., require that licensed officers of 
ships must report damages to local inspectors. The files of the Inspection 
Service, therefore (unless there has been utter disregard of law by both licensed 
officers and inspectors), contain reports regarding the above vessels, and others, 
which will prove that there was plenty of evidence upon which to base an in¬ 
vestigation. 

In this connection detail statements of some masters which appeared in the 
Marine Review, issues of December, 1913, and March, 1914, will be illuminating, 
and I therefore quote from them the following: 


348 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, ANI) 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

“ Capt. Hagen, steamer Howard M. Hanna, dr. (Lake Huron, coal laden) : 

“ ‘ We were possibly 15 miles above Point Aux Barques. The wind and sea 
had increased so that the vessel began dropping oft her course, although the en¬ 
gines were being worked at full speed ahead. 

“ ‘ Tremendous seas were coming over our bow and our starboard quarter and 
over the whole in fact, and the seas had carried away part of our after 
cabin and had broken in our pilot house windows and had torn off the top of 
the pilot house. 

“ ‘ Then shortly after eight o’clock she dropped off so that she came around 
into the trough of the sea. We had been taken seas over us right along, and 
we had been using our siphons and pumps, but we knew she was taking water 
by the way the pumps worked. * * * We lay in the trough of the sea, roll¬ 
ing heavily, with the sea washing over, * * * she drifted broadside onto 
Port Austin reef, * * * and, in my opinion, the vessel is a total loss.’ ” 

“Capt. James Kennedy, steamer Peter White (Lake Superior, ballast) : 

“ ‘At this time the seas had become so big that the ship started to throw her 
wheel out, losing her headway and going so slow that it was impossible to hold 
her head to. At times the seas would strike her and throw her off five or six 
points. We would then have to put the wheel hard a starboard and let her go 
around in order to gain headway and bring her head up on again. We had to 
turn twelve different times. During this time, while heading into it, she struck 
some of the seas very heavily, causing the ship to vibrate so much that she 
broke quite a number of her hatch sections which dropped into the hold.’ ” 
“Capt. James B. Watts, steamer J. F. Hurston, (Lake Huron, coal laden) : 

“ 4 1 leave it to the coating of ice that we got on our hatches and around our 
forward cabin and windows that we lived through the storm as well as we did. 

I think there is not a hatch on one of our lake freight steamers that would 
stop 10 minutes in its place if they got in the trough of that sea Sunday night. 
We came to anchor at Mackinaw about 1 o’clock Monday afternoon, covered 
with about 1,000 tons of ice. * * * Now, I don’t like to pass any remarks 

about the boats that were lost or how they were lost, but there is no doubt in 
my mind but that any of our side-tanked and water-bottom steamers full coal 
and grain laden that would get in the trough of the sea Sunday night for any 
length of time would turn turtle. They would start listing more or less by 
the cargo shifting some. * * * While I think that happened to some of 

them that were lost, I think some were lost by their hatches coming loose 
and they filled up and sank. * * * Those that didn’t turn turtle, their 

batches were loosened and they filled up.’ ” 

“Capt. Thomas J. Carney, steamer H. W. Smith (Lake Huron, coal laden) : 

“ ‘At 3 p. m. the seas began to get so big that they broke in the pilot house 
doors and windows and forward cabins. At 6 p. m. we lost control of the 
ship and she began to go off in the trough of the sea. Then I immediately 
ordered the wheel hard-over, and after some difficulty we managed to head 
down the lake before the sea. Then the seas began to pile over the stern, 
breaking in the after cabins and washing the rubbish in the aft of the engine 
room. * * * the seas kept piling over the decks, tearing tarpaulins into 

ribbons and wrecking the deck house.’ ” 

“Capt. H. D. McLeod, steamer Matoa (Lake Huron) : 

At b.20 of the 9th, when probably about off Sturgeon Point, encountered 
very heavy seas, which stove in the port side of the forward end of the after 
cabin, flooding the mess room, kitchen, and letting a quantity of water into 
the engine room, and also carrying away three hatch strongbacks. * * * 

about 10 p. m. she cracked a spar deck plate just forward of the boiler house 
on the starboard side, the crack extending the full width of the plate. At mid¬ 
night the after cabin was broken in by overtaking seas, the force of the water 
making a bulge of about 3 feet in the bulkhead separating the engine room 
from the dining loom at about the level of the dining room floor, and leaving 
this bulkhead only as a protection between the engine room and the sea. At 
12.30 she stranded and ran about a thousand feet before she stopped * * * 

It is my opinion that the condition of the after cabin was such that had we 
been in deeper water my boat would not have stayed afloat much longer than 

bour later tban sbe struck, as her engine room would certainly have 
filled up from water coming through the aiier partition.’ ” 

Capt. S. A. Lyons, steamer J. H. Sheadle (Lake Huron, grain laden) : 

“ ‘The after steel bulkhead of the cabin was buckled. All skylights and 
windows were broken in. A small working boat on the top of after cabin and 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 349 


tlie mate's chadburn were washed away. * * * The rolling tore adrift the 

binnacle on top of the pilot house. * * * At 8.30 a. m. it had cleared up 

* * * wind and sea going down * * * sighted what I supposed was 

the wreck of the Price, passing this hull at about a distance of 1,000 feet.’ ” 

“ Capt. W. C. Her, steamer George C. Crawford (Lake Huron, ballast) : 

“ ‘At 4.30 p. m. she blew around in the trough of the sea, and I could not get 
her head to wind again; so I put her before the wind, and checked to slow 
speed, but had to keep ringing up half and full speed every few minutes to 
keep her out of the trough of the sea. * * * and every time I would use 
the chadburn to signal the engineer I could tell she was laboring, for some¬ 
times the wires would be so tight I could not move the lever. * * * so 

the next morning going up the Soo River I had the hot-water hose put on, and 
cleaned off the ice, and then we could see lots of loose rivets and open joints 
amidships. * * * During the worst of the storm our electric whistle gave 

out, wires wore off in the cargo hold, where they go through bulkhead, and I 
could not use the hand lever, for it would be so tight at times and slack at 
times, that I had to put the deck watch in boiler house to blow the whistle for 
14 hours.’ ” 

These statements referred to the gale of November 0 and 10. 1913, and were 
in themselves sufficient to have warranted an investigation by the Inspection 
Service, particularly in view of the fact that other reports made earlier in the 
same year, only a few weeks before the November disasters, indicated the 
weaknesses of the class of vessels mentioned. On or about September 22, 1913, 
the big steamer James P. Walsh reported the loss of a number of her hatch 
covers and the smashing of her after deck house, and the steamer E. N. Ohl, 
also a large vessel, reported loosened plates. 

To prove that evidence of dangerous weaknesses in the ships has been in the 
possession of the Inspection Service for several years, I quote from official 
reports submitted to inspectors by masters and other licensed officers in 1905, 
as follows: 

Report of R. F. Humble, master, steamer Mataafa, December 1, 1905, re¬ 
ferring to the wreck of that vessel, November 28. 1905, off Duluth, Minn.: 

“ I worked along down the shore, liead-to until the snow cleared up, until I 
could see back to Duluth. Our hatch bars had begun to buckle, and I feared 
the hatches were going to go, and I knew I must get in shelter some place. 

I ordered my helm hard aport, came around, and headed for Duluth piers.” 

Forced to seek shelter, unfit to ride out the gale, because of weak batches, 
the Mataafa put back to Duluth, failed to make the piers, went broadside 
on the beach, and broke in two amidships. Though only 700 feet from shore, 
the United States life saving crew were unable to reach her on account of 
the heavy sea. Nine of the Mataafa's crew lost their lives, and 20 hours 
elapsed before the remaining 15 of her crew, almost exhausted from exposure, 
were finally rescued. 

Report of C. H. Cummings, master, Alex C. Brown, first mate, H. ,T. Bonah, 
second mate, and others, steamer Isaac L. EUwood , referring to November 28, 
1905: 

“ We remained that way from 3 o’clock a. m. until about 7.30, when the 
hatches began to come off. The tarpaulins were torn off by the seas, which 
came right over the vessel. Then I turned her and headed for Duluth.” 

The Ellwoorl had a narrow escape. She struck while entering the piers and 
sank immediately upon reaching the harbor. 

Report of A. J. Talbot, master, and W. F. Hornie, mate, steamer William 
Edenborn, December 11, 1905, referring to wreck of that steamer November 28 
of same year: 

“After she went ashore, and before it was daylight, .Tames Johnson, the sec¬ 
ond assistant engineer, fell into the hold through a hatch, three hatches, Nos. 
9, 10, and 11, having dropped in during the storm, and was killed. We found 
bis body under hatch No. 9, and from marks on his head it would indicate that 
he struck a beam, which killed him. Four other members of the crew—George 
White, steward; Albert Gray, porter; II. Reading, second cook, and George 
Davis, deckhand—also fell in the hold, the same as the man that was killed, 
but escaped by means of a ladder. There was about 4 feet of water in the hold 
of the vessel where they fell in.” 

A number of other wrecks had occurred at the same time, and during that 
season three steamers, the Kaliyuga, Iosca, and Ira H. Owen , had foundered 
with every person on board. But the Inspection Service took little, if any, 
notice of these events other than to receive and file away the reports. 


350 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


The above reports, with many others, furnishing ample evidence of weak 
hatches, improperly constructed deck houses (the smashing of which permits 
the seas to enter the boiler and engine compartments), inability to keep out or 
the trough of the sea, and other faults in the vessels, have been in the files of 
the Inspection Service for several years. Yet officials of that service pretend 
that they do not know what has been causing the loss of vessels and loss of 
life on the Great Lakes, and at the same time calmly assert that there is nothing 
upon which to base an investigation. 

In the year 1908, probably influenced by the loss of the steamers Arcadia 
and Cyprus in 1907, the former with all hands and the latter with all hands 
except one, the local inspectors at Duluth attempted to force some strengthen¬ 
ing of the hatches. As a test case they made a very mild ruling on the sub¬ 
ject in the matter of hatch fasteners on the steamer W. G. Pollock. The own¬ 
ers of the vessel promptly took an appeal to the then supervising inspector of 
that district, Mr. John D. Sloane, who sustained the local inspectors. 

Following the action of Supervising Inspector Sloane in sustaining the local 
inspectors at Duluth, the owners of the Pollock appealed to the supervising 
inspector general, who, in February, 1909, decided in favor of the shipowners. 
The decision of the supervising inspector general in this case, in view of the 
fact that the issue had to do with the question of safety of life, is in my opin¬ 
ion rather interesting, to say the least. I call your attention to the following 
copy of his letter on the subject to the law firm representing the shipowners: 

Department of Commerce and Labor, 

STEAMBOAT-INSPECTION SERVICE, 

Washington, I). C., February 20, 1909. 


Messrs. Goulder, Holding, and Masten, 

Rockefeller Building, Cleveland, Ohio: 


In the matter of the appeal of the Valley Steamship Co., by W. H. Becker, 
president, from the decision of John D. Sloane, supervising inspector of the 
fifth district, sustaining the action of the local inspectors at Duluth, Minn., 
relative to the hatch fasteners on the steamer W. G. Pollock, you are advised 
that this office has concluded that the suggestions of the local inspectors at 
Duluth in this matter can not be considered as an order against the vessel, and 
therefore need not be complied with. 

The decision of the supervising inspector is reversed and, as no change in the 
hatch fastenings has been ordered, no change is necessary. 

Papers left with the Board of Supervising Inspectors are returned under 
separate cover. 

Respectfully, 


Geo. Uhler, 


Supervising Inspector General. 


The issue had been determined not upon its merits, as affecting safety to life, 
but upon a flimsy technicality regarding the use of words. The claim had been 
raised that the ruling of the local board was merely a “ suggestion ” and not an 
order, although the records show that in letters to the owners of the vessel 
the local board had referred to it as an “order.” 

It was while the Pollock case was pending that the steamer D. M. Clemson 
foundered with all hands. 

In an interview (verified by letter, copy of which I sent you April 16, 1914) 
published in the Duluth Herald November 19, 1913, Capt. John Monaghan, local 
inspector of hulls at Duluth, referring to hatches, said in part: 

“ I made one other effort to get the matter to the board’s attention. That 
was after the steamer I). M. Clemson sank, carrying with her Capt. Chamberlin, 
of Duluth, and the entire crew, the sinking caused undoubtedly by loose hatches. 
I went to Washington and presented the matter to one of the supervising inspec¬ 
tors, who agreed with me, but asked me to say nothing until he saw me again. 
I saw him in a day or two, and was advised to drop the matter, which I did. I 
have done all I can in the matter and am on record as to that.” 

I suggest that some effort should be made to find out why the inspector named 
was advised to “ drop the matter.” 

In this matter of hatches the inspection service sanctions unsafe practices on 
the Great Lakes which it does not allow on either the Atlantic or Pacific. 

The hatch covers on the Great Lakes lap over the top of the coamings instead 
of fitting inside of the coamings, as is the practice elsewhere. The coamings 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 351 


are only S to 12 inches high, rarely 15 inches, as against 2 feet to 2 feet 6 inches 
as required on vessels in other waters. 

The hatch covers, except in a few rare instances, are not supported by strong¬ 
backs such as.are used on vessels in all other open waters. 

r l he use of freak “ patent ” hatch covers of a kind not allowed or used else¬ 
where is permitted. 


The decks of the larger steamers contain as many as 36 of these insecure 
hatches. 

Up to about the year 1902 it had been a general practice on the Great Lakes, 
as it still is elsewhere, to have strongbacks, hatch supports, under the hatch 
covers to prevent the hatches being smashed in by heavy seas. 

With the advent of the so-called modern freighter on the Great Lakes, 
usually dated from the year 1902, the number of hatches was greatly increased. 
The work of removing strongbacks from these numerous hatches every time 
the vessel loaded or discharged cargo, replacing them when getting ready for 
sea, and keeping them in repair was manifestly too much for the small crews 
employed. A choice had to be made between increasing the number of crew, 
reducing the number of hatches, or dispensing with the very necessary strong¬ 
backs and thus necessarily weakening the hatches. 

The shipowners made the choice without much delay. They eliminated the 
strongbacks in all the large bulk freighters and in many others. The inspection 
service made no objection. 

With the deepening of the channels the decks of many of the older and smaller 
types of steamer were raised in order that these vessels might be loaded deeper, 
but the hatches were not improved. The inspection service took little or no 
notice of the matter. 

While the steamers were being enormously increased in size, their power, 
engine capacity, was not increased in proportion. The large bulk cargo steamers 
on the Great Lakes are now the lowest-powered vessels afloat. For this reason 
it is difficult to keep them out of the trough of the sea in very bad weather. 

The equipment of these vessels with heavy storm sails—one forward and 
another aft—would materially improve their chances of keeping out of the 
trough. Relative to this matter, Mr. Thurman, in his letter to me June 3, 1914, 


says: 

“ In this connection, statements submitted to the department by the super¬ 
vising inspector of the ninth district and other persons, set forth that under the 
conditions prevailing during the gale in question no emergency sail, as suggested 
by you, would have held; that it would have been utterly impossible to handle 
any such sail under the iced-up condition of the ship’s gear; and, further, that 
even if such canvas could have been set and would have held it could not 
possibly have had any effect on such types and the large size of ships that were 
lost; in other words, that it would have been utterly useless.” 

The above statement amounts to almost a deiral of all sailing-ship history. 
But I can not believe that anyone will attempt to deny that very large sail 
vessels have many times, by means of a single storm sail, rode out worse gales 
than the blow which occurred on the Great Lakes November 9 and 10, 1913, and 
that such sails have been set when the weather was much colder than at that 
time. 

As to “ such types and the large size of the ships that were lost,” the super¬ 
vising inspector of the ninth district appears to have forgotten for some reason 
that the large steel barges on the Great Lakes carried sail for many years to 
help as motive power and to enable the crew to handle them in event of the tow- 
line parting in bad weather. These barges are of the same model of hull as 
the steamers, have about the same freeboard, and some of them are fully as 
large. Recently they were stripped of their sails in order that the number of 
sails employed might be reduced. 

It is a mathematical certainty that a sufficiently strong storm sail, properly 
placed, would materially help these low-freeboard steamers to keep out of the 
trough of the sea. When the pressure on one end of any vessel is greater than 
on the other end, that vessel tends to head up or pay off, according to whether 
the heaviest pressure is at the stern or at the bow. The freighters on the Lakes 
have no high superstructures amidships to catch the wind and thus interfere 
with this process. 

The sail equipment would not be expensive. In almost all cases it could be 
rigged on the masts as they are now placed. But if put on board it must be 


352 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

properly cared for, and that would involve the employment of another sailor 
or two on some of the vessels; therein lies the real objection of the shipowners 
against the use of such equipment. 

While the inspection service lias defended the conditions which exist on board 
of the ships, the shipowners themselves have recently given ample evidence that 
they know what is the matter with their vessels. Almost immediately following 
the disasters of last year the owners of new steamers that were building ordered 
changes in hatches and deck houses. For instance, the owners of the Canadian 
steamer James Carruthers, one of the vessels lost with all hands, promptly de¬ 
cided upon radical changes to be applied to their new steamer, the J. H. G. 
Hagarty. The number of hatches was reduced by one-half. “ Patent ” hatch 
covers were discarded. The hatch covers of the new vessel were made much 
stronger and were fitted inside of the coamings. Strongbacks were placed under 
the hatch covers and improved hatch bars were placed on top of them. The 
deck houses were built of heavier steel, strong deadlights were used instead of 
windows, and paneled doors were discarded and heavy solid doors took their 
place. 

Every year since I began sailing on the Great Lakes, and especially since the 
year 1902, when the larger class of steamer became numerous, there has been 
case after case which proved beyond all doubt the necessity for such changes. 
But the United States Steamboat-Inspection Service has paid little attention to 
such matters. Each time a vessel is lost with all hands the storm which 
swallowed her is described as the “ very worst ever experienced ” ; the loss is 
charged to an “ act of God.” The ship had been built and manned according 
to rules sanctioned, or permitted, by the Inspection Service; limited liability 
laws protect the shipowners, and, at least in so far as the inspectors are con¬ 
cerned, old conditions continue. 

Heavy weather can not be avoided. It is certain to come again and again. 
But weak hatches, through which vessels fill and sink, poorly constructed 
superstructures, and the lack of equipment and crew sufficient to properly 
care for and handled the vessels, can and should be remedied. 

I respectfully submit that the Inspection Service failed to make any serious 
effort to ascertain the truth as to the causes for the loss of life on the Great 
Lakes in November, 1913, as it has failed in many other instances, and that the 
neglect of its officials in this respect is a violation of both the spirit and the 
letter of the law. 

UNDERMANNING ENCOURAGED BY INSPECTION SERVICE. 

The most dangerous practice on board ship is that of undermanning. It 
carries with it a host of attendant evils affecting the vessel, its equipment 
and machinery, and even its very construction. On the Great Lakes under¬ 
manning has not only been tolerated, but it has actually been fostered by the 
Inspection Service. 

Local inspectors certify crews smaller in number than is necessary for the 
operation of the vessel and much smaller in number than is needed to properly 
safeguard against loss of life. Proof of this will be found in the very great 
number of vessels that find it necessary to employ larger crews than called 
for by their inspection certificates. 

There may be two reasons for this state of affairs: First, that local inspectors 
have been confused as to the purpose of the law relative to manning by 
instructions and decisions of their superior officers in the service; second, that 
a smaller crew than needed and actually employed is frequently certified in 
order to safeguard the master or owner (in event vessel leaves port with less 
than her regular crew) against the penalty for undermanning provided in 
sections 4453 and 4463, Revised Statutes. 

Following is a copy of the part of certificates of inspection relating to crew: 

“Also is required to carry a full complement of officers and crew, consisting of 

-licensed master,-licensed master and pilot, - licensed pilot, 

- licensed mate, - quartermaster, - seamen,-deck hand, 

-licensed chief engineer,-licensed assistant engineer,-licensed 

junior engineer, -water tender, - oiler, - firemen, - coal 

passer,-wiper, watchman, and also - persons when needed in the 

steward’s and other departments not connected with the navigation of the 
vessel.” 


















AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 353 


The capacities specifically designated, when a number is inserted, show the 
number of crew which the inspectors require the vessel to carry. The pro¬ 
vision for “ and also - persons when needed in the steward’s and other 

departments, not connected with the navigation of the vessel ” is simply a state¬ 
ment of a maximum, which may be reduced at will by the master or owner. 

The positions in the deck crew, mentioned in the certificates of inspection, 
exclusive of licensed officers, are the following: Quartermaster, seamen, deck 
hand, and watchmen, who man or may not be in the deck crew. 

Only one vessel on the Great Lakes is required to carry more than two 
quartermasters, although a very considerable number of steamers carry four 
quartermasters, who are called “ wheelsmen-lookoutsmen.” The certifications 
of only two quartermasters makes it possible for these vessels to leave port, 
without incurring any penalty, with only two men, exclusive of licensed officers, 
who are capable of taking the wheel, although four or five such men are usually 
employed. For specific cases of this nature, I mentioned the entire fleet of the 
Pittsburgh Steamship Co., consisting of about 74 steamers. There are many 
others of the same kind. 

Strange though it may seem, not more than five or six vessels are required 
by the inspectors to carry “ seamen.” In general, practice “ seamen,” as dif¬ 
ferentiated from “ deck hands,” means experienced sailors, and “ deck hand ” 
means any roustabout employed on deck. The present arrangement, that of 
not certifying any seamen at all, serves as a protection to the shipowners against 
the court decisions which hold that the crew should consist of experienced men. 
If the inspectors required the vessels to carry “ seamen ” as different from 
“ deck hands,” experienced men would have to be employed. For proof that the 
inspectors do not require vessels to carry “ seamen,” as stated above, see the 
inspection certificates of any cargo steamer, and all except those of four or five 
passenger steamers, on the Great Lakes. 

The number of “ deck hands ” specified on the inspection certificates is fre¬ 
quently less than the number needed and employed. The same is true of “ fire¬ 
men ” and others. To mention a few specific cases of this character would not 
prove anything. But if the department cares to get at the facts it can do so by 
requesting a report from local inspectors showing the number of crew, in 
various capacities, as entered on the certification of inspection, compared 
with the number actually employed. 

Although “coal passers” are employed on practically all steamers, except 
harbor craft, their number is never specified on the inspection certificates of 
cargo steamers on the Great Lakes. The inspection certificate of any such vessel 
will prove this to be true. It is a matter of some importance and I shall refer 
to it again in another paragraph. 

On April 16, 1914, I called your attention, by letter, to the ridiculous manning 
provisions entered on the inspection certificate of the passenger steamer 
Christopher Columbus, which, in part, provided for no “ seamen ” and only 5 
“ deck hands,” regardless of the fact that the vessel usually employed 21 and 
never less than 18 deck hands. 

The Inspection Service apparently ignored my statement as to the number oi 
men employed, and I was informed by letter from the department, June 3, 
quite vigorously defending its certification of the smaller number. 

Some time afterwards I happened on board of that steamer at Chicago. 1 
then discovered that on June 4, after having duly presented its “ defense ” to 
the department, the Inspection Service had changed the crew requirements in 
the inspection certificate by inserting “20 seamen” in lieu of 5 deck hands 
Other changes had also been made relative to the engineer’s crew. But foi 
some reason the department never advised me that my charges in this case had 
been sustained. There are many other cases of the same nature which require 
attention. 

48420—21-28 



354 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

The following shows the changes in the particular case referred to: 

Passenger steamer “ Christopher Columbus.”—Crew list as entered on certifi¬ 
cates of inspection, 1913 and 1914 (both certificates issued by inspectors at 
Milwaukee). 



Certificate 
issued 1913; 
inspection, 
June 17,1913. 

Certificate 
issued 1914; 
inspection,— . 


1 

1 


2 

2 

Quartermasters. 

2 

2 

Spqmp.n ... 

0 

20 

T)p.p1t hanrls_ _ . ._. 

5 

0 

P,h i pf p.n pi n ppr ._._. 

1 

1 

Assistant enpinper _._ . 

1 

1 

Junior engineer __ . . 

0 

1 

Water tenders . _. 

0 

4 


2 

2 

Firemen .. ... 

4 

6 

Coal passers . 

3 

6 

Watchmen ... 

4 

6 

Persons when needed in steward’s or other departments not connected with 
the navigation of the vessel . 

135 

108 


The 1913 certificate shows total deck and engine department crews to be 25. 
The same departments in the 1914 certificate show a total of 52. The complete 
total, which includes the “ when needed ” provision, used quite generally as a 
cloak to cover undermanning, is exactly the same in both instances, being 160 
in both certificates. 

The fact of the matter is that the number employed in the deck and engine 
departments of the vessel was the same in one year as in the other, and that 
in 1913 the inspectors certified the vessel for less than half the crew she needed 
and actually employed. Under the arrangements in 1913 the vessel could leave 
port with less than half her regular crew without incurring any penalty under 
the law. The new arrangement simply compels her to carry her regular crew 
or be subject to the penalty for leaving shorthanded; the only other change 
actually affecting the vessel is the requirement for “ seamen ” instead of 
“ deck hands.” 

The vessel itself was the same in 1913 as in 1914, no alterations were made 
in her, the route was the same in both years, there was no change in equipment, 
and there was no increase in the number of passengers allowed; in fact, there 
was a slight reduction in 1914. 

The inspection certificate of almost every freight steamer on the Great Lakes 
calls for a given number of “ deck hands ” but no “ coal passers.” Regardless 
of this, however, coal passers are regularly shipped under the name of “ deck 
hands ” and the number of actual “ deck hands ” left short. Thus, six men 

will be shipped as “ deck hands ” and signed on the ship’s articles in that 

capacity in a pretended compliance with the terms of the inspection certificate. 
They serve as deck hands in port. But immediately the vessel puts to sea four 
of these men are required to work in the fire hold and coal bunkers as coal 

passers. When the vessel is about to enter port, as soon as the engines are 

checked, they are called out from the heat of the fire hold and coal bunkers to 
the chilly and often icy atmosphere of the deck. It is a cruel, almost inhuman 
practice and is not allowed anywhere else in the world. It is discountenanced 
by even the inspection service everywhere except on the Great Lakes. 

I brought this matter to the attention of the officials of the inspection service 
in March, and again in April, of this year, but they evaded making any reply 
on the subject. Later I was given an opportunity to submit some definite cases 
to Mr. Thurman, then Acting Secretary, for a ruling. I did so by letter dated 
June 18, 1914, and was later, during an interview with Mr. Thurman on August 
7, informed that the department had investigated the cases and had found my 
statement as to the practice to be correct. Mr. Thurman stated, however, that 
he was not prepared to say whether the practice was illegal or not, and advised 
me that he would confer with Mr. Sweet concerning it. This is the last I havfr 
heard of the matter. 


























AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 355 


Tlie third section of section 4403, Revised Statutes, which regulates working 
hours for licensed officers, is absolutely ignored by all local inspectors on the 
Great Lakes. That part of the law is being violated daily because inspectors 
do not certify a sufficient number of men either as officers or crew to make com¬ 
pliance with it possible. 

To show some of the reasons why local inspectors have failed in their duties, 
especially as to manning regulations, I submit the following: 

On June 15, 1904, nearly 1,000 persons lost their lives in the burning of the 
steamer General Slocum. In the investigation which followed it was shown 
that the vessel was inefficiently manned as well as improperly equipped. With 
reference to the crew, the report of the United States commission which inves¬ 
tigated the disaster contains the following statement: 

“The inefficiency and poor quality of the deck crew of this vessel, doubtless 
typical of the majority of crews of excursion steamers, is one of the essential 
facts that caused the loss of so many lives.” 

As one of the results of this disaster, there were introduced in Congress cer¬ 
tain bills providing for laws to regulate manning, and thus section 4463, Re¬ 
vised Statutes, after some delay, was amended in 1908 so as to require that 
every vesel under the jurisdiction of the inspection service was to carry such 
complement of officers and crew as would, in the judgment of the local inspec¬ 
tors, be necessary for her safe navigation. 

The change in the law was clearly intended to improve the manning system. 
It became operative July 1, 1908. 

I now call your attention to the following copy of a circular letter containing 
instructions to supervising and local inspectors relative to the amended law: 


[Department of Commerce and Labor. Steamboat-Inspection Service, Washington. D. N. H. 

File No. 26927. Circular letter.] 


June 15, 1908. 

United States supervising and local inspectors of steamboats. 

Gentlemen : Inclosed you will find a copy of Public Document No. 84, citing 
the provisions of “An act to amend section 4463 of the Revised Statutes re¬ 
lating to the complement of crews of vessels, and for the better preservation of 
life,” which act was approved by the President on April 2, 1908, and takes 
effect on July 1, 1908. 

Substantially, the effect of this legislation is simply to legalize the practice 
that has been followed by local inspectors of specifying in the certificate of 
inspection the minimum number of licensed officers and crew necessary for the 
safe navigation of the vessel, a practice which has been held to have been 
irregular and without authority of law. 

This authority has now been firmly and definitely established by the pro¬ 
visions of the act herein referred to, and there should be no further question 
of its legality. 

On and after July 1, 1908, local inspectors will, at each annual inspection, 
make an entry in the certificate of inspection of the vessel of the minimum 
number of licensed officers and crew as in the judgment of the inspectors is 
necessary for her safe navigation and the protection of all on board, which 
number may be changed only under such conditions as are provided for by the 
act. 

The right of appeal contemplated by the act must be exercised within 48 hours 
of the final action of the local inspectors, in default of which no appeal will be 


considered. 

Respectfully, 


Geo. Uhler, 

Supervising Inspector General. 

W. P. G. 


Approved. 


Charles Earl, 
Acting Secretary. 


The instructions that the right of appeal from local inspectors must be 
exercised within 48 hours had the effect of excluding from that right nearly 
every man on board the ships and all the representatives of such men. The 
right of appeal was thus effective only for shipowners and those who repre¬ 
sented shipowners. Others could not without very great difficulty obtain 
official information regarding decisions within such brief space of time. After 
the old system of manning had been fastened down under the new law, a longer 
time for appeal was allowed. 


356 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Under the existing- practice in manning of vessels referred to in the circular 
letter quoted above, many of the local inspectors had been certifying a given 
number of “ deck* crew ” in addition to licensed officers. These local inspectors 
evidently considered the instructions of the Supervising Inspector General to 
mean that the new law required them to reduce the crew to a minimum. 

Thus the inspection certificate of the steamer William H. Wolf, issued before 
the law was amended, contained requirements (which, however, had been 
ignored by the owners of the vessel) for “2 pilots, 2 quartermasters, 2 watch¬ 
men, and 15 deck crew,” a total of 21 in the deck department. The certificate 
of this vessel, issued after the law was amended, provided for “2 pilots, 2 
quartermasters, 2 watchmen, and 6 deckhands,” or a total of only 12 in the deck 
department, this being the number satisfactory to the owners and which they 
had employed when ignoring the judgment of local inspectors, as indicated on 
the previous certificate of inspection. 

I cite other instances of the same character, referring in each case to the deck 
department, only to prove the very great and peculiar change that took place 
in the supposed “ judgment ” exercised by local inspectors after the law was 
amended, as compared with their judgment as expressed on the certificates of 
inspection issued before the amendment of the law: 

Steamer John Stanton, before amendment of law in 1908, deck crew specified 
on inspection certificate, “ 2 pilots, 17 deck crew,” total of 19; after the amend¬ 
ment of law, “ 2 pilots, 2 quartermasters, 2 watchmen, 6 deck hands,” a total 
of 12. 

Steamer IF. G. Pollock, before amendment of law the certificate called for “ 2 
pilots, 15 deck crew,” a total of 17; after the law was amended, “ 2 pilots, 2 
quartermasters, 2 watchmen, 5 deck hands,” a total of 11. 

T refer to other cases of the same kind, giving the total figures only, and 
referring solely to the deck department, as follows: 

Steamer Frank Rockefeller, before the amendment of law, 19; after, 11. 
Steamer Northern Queen, before, 16; after, 11. Steamer Scranton, before, 15; 
after, 10. Steamer Joseph Salwood, before, 17; after, 12. Steamer Northern 
Kino, before, 16; after. 11. 

These cases, I believe, are sufficient to show that some perculiar influence had 
affected the “ judgment ” of the local inspectors. The amended law enacted 
for the purpose of improving the manning of steam vessels was used only to 
shift responsibility for undermanning from the shipowners to the United States 
Steamboat-Inspection Service. Instead of making conditions on board ship 
better, as was intended, the law was misused in such a way as to further limit 
the liability of the vessel owners. 

I have before me a copy of department circular No. 196, dated August 19, 
1909, on “ Undermanning of inspected vessels,” in which the following appears: 

“ The fact that a vessel arrives safely is not conclusive of sufficient manning. 
A vessel is insufficiently manned under this paragraph when in the inspector’s 
judgment the amount of work required of the men has been unreasonable.” 

The men in the deck crews were and still are very frequently required to 
remain on duty continuously for from 18 to 24 hours and even longer when 
In port, and then stand their regular sea watch of 6 hours in addition to this 
after leaving the harbor, thus making from 24 to 30 hours or more continuous 
duty. In many instances this occurs about once every three days. The 
“amount of work required of the crew ” in such cases is certainly unreasonable 
within the meaning of the instructions contained in the department circular. 

The condition described was then and is now well known to the officials of the 
Steamboat-Inspection Service, but they permit it to continue even in the face 
of such instructions as referred to above. 

Perhaps some reason for this may be found in the decision rendered by the 
Supervising Inspector General in the case of the towing steamer Imperial 
(Knickerbocker Towage Co., New York). May 17, 1911, which practically nulli¬ 
fied the instructions of the department and resulted in chaos throughout the 
service, from which I quote the following: 

“ In deciding this appeal I have not taken into consideration the number of 
deck hands that might be necessary for handling hawsers, etc., as this is a 
matter that must be determined by the master or owners of the steamer, and 
so long as the local inspectors specify sufficient officers and crew for the’ safe 
navigation of the vessel, I am of the opinion that they have no right to specify 
how many officers and crew are necessary to meet the business requirements 
of the vessel, or to arrange or determine the different watches, further than to 
specify a relief if the service of the vessel requires more than one watch.” 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 357 


“Handling hawsers” on towing vessels is, of course, a most important duty. 
The seaman who would refuse to perform that duty at sea would be liable to 
severe punishment under the law. The decision was in direct conflict with the 
instructions of the department. It acted as a further restraint upon local in¬ 
spectors everywhere and put a damper on the spirit of the entire service. The 
result is that undermanning of the kind I have described in this statement 
continues as a regular practice on the Great Lakes. 

DANGEROUS CONDITIONS ON PASSENGER VESSELS. 

It is a very general practice to navigate crowded passenger steamers with 
hatches unfastened, main deck gangways and ports wide open and in such 
condition that none of these openings can be quickly closed in event of accident. 
This is a condition due almost entirely to undermanning. In this connection 
I quote the following from my letter to you dated August 9, 1914: 

“ One week ago Saturday, August 1 to be exact, I was on board the steamer 
Christopher Columbus as a passenger from Chicago to Milwaukee. I noticed 
that every one of her eight large gangways are in such condition that not one 
of them can be closed quickly in event of accident. None can be closed properly 
in the condition which they were in on that day. 

“ In view of the fact that most of the compartments of this vessel are open 
on the main deck, to which these gangways lead, this is a case of, in my opinion, 
almost criminal neglect. If through some temporary stoppage of her engines 
during bad weather, which may occur at any time, she got into the trough of 
the sea, or in event of collision, causing her to list, she would fill herself 
through her open ports. I made no measurements of these gangways, but I 
judged them to be something like 6 feet square. Of the 50 or 60 bolt holes in 
each gangway, some are entirely plugged so that bolts can not he put into them 
at all, and the threads in most of the others are filled with rust and paint. It 
is plain to be seen that they have been in this condition for some time, yet the 
inspectors appear to have paid no attention to it. It is, of course, a result of 
undermanning, not enough of a deck crew to attend to such work. 

“ May I suggest that if instructions are issued, perhaps to the inspectors at 
Chicago, where the vessel lays overnight, to go on board without notice to crew 
or owners and to order the gangways closed and made reasonably water-tight 
by the crew, all bolts to be put in and set up tight, the inspectors to remain on 
board until the operation is complete, and then to report to the department 
just how long it takes to properly close all of the eight gangways, if they can 
be closed at all without repairs, you will get a startling illustration of the 
extent to which carelessness and neglect have been permitted on the Great 
Lakes.” 

The department acknowledged the receipt of this letter and advised me that 
the matter would have the immediate attention of the Steamboat-Inspection 
Service. But it did not inform me as to the results of its investigation. I have 
learned, nevertheless, that a test was made and that it took about one hour to 
partially secure the gangways while the vessel was laying at her dock, where 
the services of every member of her deck crew were available. 

I have been informed also that Supervising Inspector Westcott came from 
Detroit to assist the local inspectors in making this very simple test. He appears 
to have considered it unnecessary to order the gangways securely closed. The 
fact that it took an hour to partially fasten them proves, of course, that they 
were in a dangerous condition. But it gives little idea of just how bad they were. 

It was through unfastened hatches that the Monroe filled so quickly after 
her collision off the Virginia Capes last winter (see Findings of Local Inspector 
of Hulls, Philadelphia, p. 32). Practically every passenger vessel on the Great 
Lakes is in far worse shape in the matter of hatches and gangways than was 
the Monroe. But the Steamboat-Inspection Service has seen fit to ignore this 
condition. In the case of the Christopher Columbus they ignored it deliberately 
after their attention had been called to the dangerous condition of that vessel 
and even after they had made the peculiar test referred to. 

As further evidence that the inspectors have not given sufficient consideration 
to the question of safety I cite the cases of the steamers Marquette and Bes¬ 
semer No. 2 and Pere Marquette No. 18, car-carrying vessels of the same type. 
The Marquette and Bessemer No. 2 foundered with all hands in 1909. The fol¬ 
lowing season, 1910, the inspectors certified the Pere Marquette No. 18 to 
operate as an excursion steamer, without requiring any improvements in the 
matter of either manning, construction, or equipment. Four days after the 


358 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


close of the excursion season she foundered,' drowning 27 of her crew. If that 
disaster had occurred a few days previously with a full load of excursionists 
on board the loss of life would have been enormous. The fact that another 
vessel of that peculiar construction had disappeared with everybody on board 
only a short time before seems not to have caused the inspectors even the 
slightest hesitation in certifying the No. 18 as an excursion steamer and per¬ 
mitting her to carry a couple of thousand people. 

In all instances, with perhaps two or three exceptions, the deck crews of 
passenger vessels on the Great Lakes consist of from 3 to 5 sailors, exclusive 
of the licensed officers, and anywhere from 6 to 35 “ roustabouts,” who know 
little or nothing about ships and who do not stand any watch while the vessel is 
out of port. This certainly is a condition for which the inspectors are largely 
responsible. 

The very recent case of the burning of the steamer City of Chicago is one of 
several that should serve as a warning. 

I regret that the Inspection Service (as indicated in your letter to Mr. Hanson 
and in Mr. Thurman’s letter to me) has sought to hide some of its shortcomings 
under the claim that the storm of November, 1913, was so unprecedented in its 
fury that no precaution of man could have prevailed against it; that some of the 
Canadian vessels lost were ocean steamers; and that the foundering of 
lightship 82 proved no one was at fault except God. 

I have no criticism to make of the Lighthouse Service in reference to the 
foundering of lightship 82, but I do not think the loss of that vessel and its 
unfortunate crew should be used in an effort to prevent improvements on other 
types of vessels. Let me say also that I believe there will be some hesitation 
on the part of the Lighthouse Service before again placing a lightship of the 
same small-sized, closely balanced type as the 82 in a spot where she is certain 
to ice up very heavily at times. 

The Canadian ocean steamers which were lost were in little, if any, better 
shape than the other vessels. When they were brought to the Great Lakes 
changes were made in their manning and equipment in order to save labor cost. 
It is not the first time that such vessels were lost on the Lakes because they had 
adopted the slipshod methods permitted in these waters. The steamer Bannock¬ 
burn, lost with all hands on Lake Superior some years ago, was of exactly the 
same type. 

My reply to the claim regarding the unprecedented severity of the storm of 
November, 1913, is that the gale referred to was only one of many that have 
occurred here. In every gale vessels undermanned, improperly equipped, and of 
weak construction in many parts are forced to take big chances in seeking 
shelter, for the reason that they are unfit to ride out any very severe storms. 

The reports of the United States Weather Bureau show that on November 28, 
1905, at Duluth, when a number of wrecks occurred, the gale registered 68 
miles, as against 62 and 56 miles at Port Huron, Mich., on November 9 and 
10, 1913. 

It has been quite a fashion to refer to every severe blow as “ a gale of un¬ 
precedented fury.” So it was last spring, when on April 29 the steel steamer 
Benjamin Noble foundered with all hands. So it was again a few weeks ago, 
when on November 19 the steamer C. F. Curtis and the barges Marvin and 
Peterson were lost on Lake Superior with every person on board. 

Has the Inspection Service attempted to give no reason for the foundering of 
the Benjamin Noble? She was inspected in Detroit only a few days before she 
went down. The law requires the inspection of the entire vessel, including the 
hull. I have been advised that the Noble loaded steel rails at Conneaut before 
proceeding to Detroit for inspection. Being of the single-deck type, part of her 
load must have been on deck. How was it possible to properly examine her 
hull, or even her hatches, with that load on board? Yet she was inspected. 
However, that is the way of the Steamboat-Inspection Service. 

It has been claimed by the Supervising Inspector General that the reason 
stricter safety regulations are not enforced on the Great Lakes is because the 
conditions of marine risk are not as great as elsewhere. If the supervising 
inspectors really believe that the conditions of marine risk are so much less on 
the Great Lakes than on other waters, let them say why at their last meeting 
they adopted the following startling and, in my opinion, absolutely inhuman 
rule: 

“ Whenever it appears to the licensed officers of steamers of over 100 gross 
tons, not equipped with wireless telegraphy, navigating the Great Lakes, that 
the vessel is in imminent danger of being lost under conditions that there is a 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 359 

possibility of the facts in the case or cause of the loss being unknown, it shall 
be the doty of the licensed officers in charge to cause to be prepared a report 
stating the cause of the loss of the vessel and giving the facts connected there¬ 
with as fully as possible, also a list of the officers and crew, the same to be 
inclosed in the message case or receptacle to be carried for that purpose, in order 
that the facts in connection with the loss of the vessel may eventually become 
known to the officers of this service.” 

Please note that this remarkable rule, the like of which is unknown anywhere 
else in the world, is made applicable only to the Great Lakes. The Board of 
Supervising Inspectors considered such a rule unnecessary for vessels on the 
oceans. It is proof that the board itself believes the so-called mysterious dis¬ 
appearances of vessels under their jurisdiction on the Great Lakes will continue. 

Instead of making a proper investigation to permit the truth to become 
public—I do not charge that the inspectors are so inefficient as not to know 
it themselves—the board attempts to shift its responsibility onto the shoulders 
of drowning men. 

I submit that I have herein presented sufficient facts to warrant a thorough 
investigation of the United States Steamboat-Inspection Service. I believe 
that if you will personally acquaint yourself with these facts you will find 
a way to compel such changes in the service as may be necessary to render it 
of real value to the public. 

Respectfully submitted. 

V. A. Olandeb, 

Secretary Lake Seamen’s Union, 570 West Lake Street, Chicago, III. 


Department of Commerce, 

Office of the Secretary, 
Washington, December 26, 191 4 . 

Y. A. Olander, 

Secretary Lake Seamen’s Union, 570 West Lake Street, Chicago, III. 

Sir: Your letter of the 19th instant, addressed to the Hon. William C. Red- 
field, Secretary of Commerce, inclosing statement, in detail, of assertions which 
you have made in letters to Mr. Redfield, regarding the inefficiency of the 
United States Steamboat-Inspection Service. 

In reply you are informed that your statements will have the consideration 
of the department, and you will be further advised. 

Respectfully, 


E. F. Sweet, Assistant Secretary. 


Department of Commerce, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary, 

Washington, January 23, 1915. 

Y. A. Olander, 

Lake Seamen’s Union, 

570 West Lake Street, Chicago, III. 

Dear Sir: Referring again to your communication of December 19, 1914, to 
the Secretary of Commerce, permit me to give you the result of my investiga¬ 
tion of your statements on page 41 concerning the Benjamin Noble. 

Early in April, 1914, her owner made inquiry of the local inspectors at Detroit 
as to when they could inspect her, stating at the same time that she was 
laid up at a Lake Erie port, that her previous inspection would expire April 
19, 1914, that she was chartered to load steel at Conneaut, Ohio, and that the 
cargo would be offered for loading before the inspection of the vessel could be 
made at her loading port, that if the Detroit board would inspect the steamer 
at that city while loaded she would be brought there for inspection and thus 
save considerable loss of time. He was informed that this could not be done 
unless the hull of said steamer had been examined by inspectors of the Govern¬ 
ment service before the cargo was taken on board. Subsequently, and on April 
16, 1914, Mr. Francomb, the owner, made formal application for the inspection 
of the Benjamin Noble, stating that the interior examination of the hull had 
been made by the local inspectors at Cleveland, Ohio. The Detroit board com¬ 
municated' with the local inspectors at Cleveland and ascertained that the 




3G0 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF TITE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


statement of tlie owner was correct, and that certain alterations had been 
recommended by them. They further ascertained, by personal inspection on 
April 21, 1914, that certain other alterations were necessary and ordered them 
to be made. On April 22, 1914, it was found by further inspection that all the 
alterations ordered by the inspectors at Cleveland and Detroit had been satis¬ 
factorily completed. 

The vessel was loaded with steel rails, stowed snugly in her hold, but no 
part of her cargo was on deck. The six cargo hatches were clear and unob¬ 
structed by cargo of any kind. They were found to be properly fastened and 
in good condition. , 

Turning from this statement, made by officers who did the work and who 
speak from personal knowledge, I read the following from your statement: “ I 
have been advised that the Noble loaded steel rails at Conneaut, before proceed¬ 
ing to Detroit for inspection. Being of the single-deck type, part of her load 
must have been on deck. How was it possible to examine her hull or even her 
hatches with that load on board? Yet she was ‘inspected.’ However, that is 
the way of the Steamboat-Inspection Service.” 

Your information seems to be entirely of a hearsay character. It seems to 
me scarcely w r orthy of yourself or the cause you represent. Our local inspectors 
are the product of the civil-service system. They are men who are working 
for their living and are entitled to a square deal from other men who are 
likewise working for their living. If they do wrong it is entirely proper to call 
their shortcomings to the attention of this department, so that a careful investi¬ 
gation may be made. In some such cases the good of the service may require 
removals. 

If you are able to present facts which contradict the report we have received 
in the Benjamin Noble case we would be glad to have you do so. Otherwise we 
would be forced to the conclusion that your reflections upon our inspectors are 
unjust 

As I have previously informed you, we are investigating and shall continue 
to investigate the Steamboat-Inspection Service. 

Very truly, yours, 


E. F. Sweet, Acting Secretary. 


Lake Seamen’s Union, 
Chicago, III., April 6, 1915. 

Hon. E. F. Sweet, 

Acting Secretary Department of Commerce, 

Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: Referring to your letter of January 23 relative to the Benjamin 
Noble case, permit me to submit the following: 

According to your statement the Noble took on her cargo while in the course 
of inspection—that is to say, upon application of the owner the local inspectors 
at Cleveland made a partial inspection by examining the hull. The steamer was 
then permitted to proceed to Detroit, where the general inspection was com¬ 
pleted while the full cargo was on board. 

In a decision rendered by the court at Detroit (Judge Tuttle) the owners 
of the vessel have been denied limited liability, the court stating: “ In this case 
I think and find that the Noble foundered because she was overloaded.” 

The cargo consisted of steel rails, very heavy in proportion to the space it 
occupies; the vessel was of the single-deck type, and in such cases it is usual 
to place part of the load on deck, so that through this distribution of weight the 
rolling of the vessel in bad weather is eased. I had assumed that the Noble 
had followed this custom, but according to your letter I was evidently mistaken. 

However, in the course of inspection and under the observation of the 
United States local inspectors this vessel was overloaded to such an extent that 
her deck was awash, and because of this overloading, according to the court, 
she foundered and every person on board was lost. 

Allow me to say now that under the circumstances I believe the department 
should have taken drastic action against the inspectors in this particular case 
instead of defending them and questioning my motives as you saw fit to do. 

Respectfully, yours, 


Y. A. Olander, Secretary. 






AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13 ; AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 361 


Department of Commerce, 

Office of the Secretary, 
Washington, April 17, 1915. 

Mr. V. A. Olander, 

General Secretary Lake Seamen's Union, 

Sir : The department is in receipt of your letter of April 6, 1915, referring to 
the loss of the steamer Benjamin Noble. 

itli reference to the overloading of this vessel, you are probably as well 
aware as the department that the Steamboat-Inspection Service has no author¬ 
ity to say how much cargo shall be placed in a vessel. It undoubtedly would 
be well to have a law designating the deep load line, but in the absence of such 
a law the inspectors are without authority to say what the load line shall be. 

Referring particularly to the next to the last paragraph of your letter, it 
would seem that you infer that the deck of the vessel was awash while she was 
being inspected, and if you are laboring under this impression, you are mis¬ 
taken, for both the local inspectors of steam vessels at Detroit., Mich., and 
Cleveland, Ohio, state that the decks of the steamer Benjamin Noble were not 
awash at any time that they were on board making the inspection. 

Respectfully, 


Mr. 


E. F. Sweet, Acting Secretary. 

V. A. Olander, 

General Secretary Lake Seamen’s Union, 

570 West Lake Street. 


Lake Seamen’s Union, 
Chicago, III., April 22, 1915. 

Hon. E. F. Sweet, 

Acting Secretary, Department of Commerce, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favor of the 17tli instant in 
response to my letter of April 7, relative to the loss of the steamer Benjamin 
Noble. 

It is true that under ordinary circumstances the inspectors do not exercise 
any authority as to how much cargo shall be placed in a vessel, and that they 
see little of the ships except at the annual inspection. But let me remind you 
that in this case, according to your letter of January 23, 1915, the steamer was 
loaded during the time of inspection, and before the inspection was completed, 
under authority granted by the inspectors. This, it appears, was permitted as 
a convenience to the owners of the vessel. 

As to the extreme overloading of the vessel, and the resulting sacrifice of the 
lives of her entire crew, I prefer to accept the verdict of the court rather than 
that of the inspectors involved in the case who are naturally defending them¬ 
selves. Surely you do not intend to ignore it? 

The court said: “ She must have been loaded almost decks to. The witnesses 
who saw her at Conneaut, almost all, placed her down practically decks to.” 
At another point the court refers to water coming on deck “ while she was lying 


here at Detroit.” 

The inspectors had no right to issue a certificate permitting a vessel in that 
condition to leave port. She was plainly unseaworthy while under their obser¬ 
vation, and they should therefore have refused to issue the certificate of 
inspection. 

In my judgment this is a case of either gross negligence of the most serious 
character or extreme incompetence on the part of the inspectors. 

I most respectfully ask, for the good of the service, that the department pro¬ 
ceed to take such action against the inspectors at Detroit and Cleveland as is 
provided for by the law. 

Respectfully. 

V. A. Olander, 

Secretary Lake Seamen’s Union. 

Mr. Jefferis. Do you know what has happened since 1914 ? 

Mr. Nolan. No, sir. As I say, I am pretty ignorant of these mat¬ 
ters before those dates. I did not think of the questions that would 



362 AMENDING SECTIONS '2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

be asked. I had no such table tabulated, but I gathered the im¬ 
pression that an attempt was being made to show you or explain to 
you or give you the impression that the Lakes were not dangerous, 
and I dug up that information last night, happened to have that in 
my hand there. If the committee wants it, when I get back to my 
office I will try to bring the data down to 1920. 

Mr. Hardy. I wish you would. 

Mr. Nolan. In other words, I will give you a list of vessels lost 
since 1914 and the number of casualties. 

Mr. Bankhead. With the number of casualties. 

Mr. Scott. I will furnish that information. It is very easily avail¬ 
able. The Department of Commerce has a record of all the ships that 
are lost. 

Mr. Hardy. If you can give that information from any sources, 
put it in your testimony also. 

Mr. Nolan. All right, sir. The statement was made that the sea¬ 
men’s law could be applied to ocean boats; that there is no distinc¬ 
tion in the application of the seamen’s law between the ocean vessels 
and lake vessels; that is, that the restrictions are the same as regards 
the lake vessels as for ocean vessels. That is not quite true. In the 
first place, the seamen’s law, that you get an able seaman’s certifi¬ 
cate on salt water, requires 36 months’ experience, while on the 
Lakes it only requires only 18 months’ experience. Also as to life¬ 
saving equipment requirements on the Lakes, safety equipment pro¬ 
visions of the seamen’s law do not apply to passenger boats operat¬ 
ing within 3 miles off shore, nor do they apply to passenger vessels 
operating more than 3 miles from shore over routes where the water is 
not deep enough to submerge the deck of the vessel. The regula¬ 
tions of the United States Supervising Inspector cover the above 
cases. The following table will illustrate my point. 

Take an imaginary ship carrying 1,000 people. That boat, if she 
was operating on salt water within 3 miles of the shore between May 
15 and September 15, would require lifeboats for 350 people, rafts 
for 350 people, and there would be neither boats nor rafts for the 
other 300. The same boats operating on the Lakes within 3 miles 
from shore between May 15 and September 15 would require life¬ 
boats for 25 people, rafts for 75 people, and neither boats nor rafts 
for the other 900. Between September 15 and May 15 the ocean 
requirements would be lifeboats for 750 people and rafts for 250 
people. Lake requirements would be lifeboats for 250 and rafts 
for 750, the boats operating more than 3 miles from shore. The ocean 
requirements between May 15 and September 15 would be lifeboats 
for 350, rafts for 350, and neither boats nor rafts for the other 300. 
The Lake requirements in the same period operating more than 3 
miles from shore between May 15 and September 15 would be life¬ 
boats for 200 people, rafts for 300 people, and neither boats nor 
rafts for the other 500. The safety provisions of the seamen’s law are 
less already on the Lakes than on salt water. This proposed amend¬ 
ment intends to lessen them still further. 

Mr. Briggs. Did those figures you gave give the requirements on 
the Lakes after September 15 more than 3 miles from shore ? 

Mr. Nolan. No; they are the same, I think. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I wanted to get. I did not understand 
that clearly. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 363 


Mr. Nolan. Operating more than 3 miles from shore between 
September 15 and May 15. 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; between September 15 and May 15 on the Lakes. 

Mr. Nolan. September 15 and May 15 with 75 per cent and 25 
per cent; it is the same on both. 

Mr. Fttruseth. No. 

Mr. Scott. As that question has been asked, may I ask one ques¬ 
tion? What passenger boats do you know of operating on Lake 
Michigan, Lake Huron, or Lake Superior that operate within the 
3-mile limit ? 

Mr. Nolan. Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, and Lake Huron ? 

Mr. Scott. Lake Michigan or Lake Huron or Lake Superior—is 
there any passenger boat that operates on those lakes within the 
3-mile limit exclusively, 

Mr. Nolan. No; I clo not know of any. I know of some on Lake 
Erie. 

Mr. Scott. I know that, but I am asking you about the three 
lakes I am particularly interested in. I wanted to know if you knew 
of any passenger boats that operate on the three lakes that I have 
mentioned. 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know of any. 

The Chairman. Proceed with your statement. 

Mr. Scott. You never worked yourself on any passenger vessel? 

Mr. Nolan. No. 

The Chairman. Let each man keep his memorandum and ask ques¬ 
tions at the conclusion of the statement of the witness. I would 
like to get through to-day if we can. 

Mr. Nolan. Notwithstanding the fact that the same provisions of 
law are not as strict on the Lakes as on the salt water, this proposed 
amendment intends to still further lessen the boats and rafts car¬ 
ried on the Lakes; in other words, to still lower the standard of 
equipment. On page 7, starting at line 13 of this proposed amend¬ 
ment, it states this: 

At no moment of its voyage may any passenger steam vessel of the United 
States on the Great Lakes, on routes more than 3 miles offshore, except over 
waters whose depth is not sufficient to submerge all the decks of the vessel, 
have on board a total number of persons, including passengers and crew, 
greater than that for whom accommodations is provided in lifeboats and pon¬ 
toon life rafts on board. The accommodations provided in lifeboats shall in 
every case be sufficient to accommodate at least 50 per cent of the persons on 
board. 

The present law is 75 per cent. That reduces the number of life¬ 
boats that have to be carried 25 per cent. 

The number and type of such lifeboats and life rafts shall be determined by 
regulations of the Board of Supervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary 
of Commerce: Provided, That during the interval from May 1 to October 15, 
inclusive, any such steamer on routes more than 3 miles offshore but not more 
than 10 ’miles offshore, except over waters whose depth is not sufficient to 
submerge all the decks of the vessel, shall be required to carry accommodations 
for not less than 25 per cent of persons on board in lifeboats and pontoon 
life rafts. 

I want to call to your attention that the per cent required is 50 
per cent of the persons on board, that this amendment cuts down 
the present requirements 100 per cent; that is, the present require¬ 
ments would be 100 per cent more than the requirements if this 
amendment goes through. 


3G4 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

There is one other little item on the same equipment clause. On 
jj>age 10, starting with line 5, it says: 

Provided further , That on the Great Lakes and their connecting waters rafts 
carried need not have a capacity of exceeding 15 persons. 

The present requirements require a certain percentage of rafts 
that will carry more than 15 persons. 

I am opposed to that amendment—the rstrictions put on ship¬ 
owners as to the amount of boats and rafts they shall carry under the 
present law. I do not believe it is excessive. In many instances it 
is not as much as is required on the ocean, and I do not see ahy 
necessity for further reducing the standard of safety of life. It has 
been a tradition with sailors ever since there were any sailors that 
their duty was first to the passengers and then to themselves. If we 
are going to cut down the number of lifeboats and rafts to the mini¬ 
mum, there is no chance for the sailors. The men aboard the boats, 
the men that I represent, are at sea practically all the time except 
when the boat is in port. They are not managing boats from a 
chair in an office. They have a vital interest in the amount of life¬ 
saving equipment aboard the boats. 

The question has been raised about the shipowners’ likelihood to 
employ capable men regardless of whether there is a seamen’s law 
compelling them to or not. Years ago there was not any Steamboat- 
Inspection Service. The shipowners could build any type of boat 
they wanted. They could carry lifeboats or not, whether they wanted 
to or not. 

There were no restrictions regarding fire-fighting appliances in 
the Nation of the United States; this country, every man in it, I sup¬ 
pose, is part of the Nation. We had to get a Steamboat-Inspection 
Service with definite penalties provided for in case the recommenda¬ 
tions or orders of this service were not lived up to to force shipowners 
to build their boats according to the prescribed rules, to build hall¬ 
ways, and so on, where they were needed, to carry fire extinguishers, 
and carry fire hose and fire buckets. That is needed. If they would 
not do that voluntarily, I do not know why they would carry skilled 
men voluntarily. I know that this is the case, especially out of Chi¬ 
cago, that boats before the passage of the seamen’s law used to carry 
from four to six skilled men. 

There was no standard of efficiency; they were supposed to be 
skilled men. The rest of the deck crew was what we call ordinary 
seamen, the deck hands. These ordinary seamen, the deck hands, 
were recruited from what is known as the first ward, generally, 
around Chicago. In those days they used to be at Hinky Dink’s 
place, and Bath House John’s, and all the barrel houses, as they 
were called. The majority of these deck hands were out-and-out 
tramps and down-and-out bums, and they made up the bulk of the 
deck crew on these excursion steamers. They were men of no train¬ 
ing and no ability, and a type of men that I would not want to help 
save the life of my sister or my mother or any of my relatives if 
they were on any one of those boats. There has been some talk 
about leaving the crew up to the requirements of the steamboat in¬ 
spectors. Up until about 10 years ago the steamer Christopher 
Columbus , carrying at that time 3,(500 passengers, was allowed by 
the inspection department to operate with about G skilled or sup- 





AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 365 

posedly skilled men in the deck crew and 5 ordinary seamen—11 
men in the deck crew. 

The statement has been made that able seamen can quit and hold 
up the ship. I have been in Detroit as agent for the sailors’ union in 
the years 1917, 1918, 1919, and 1920. They were the four hardest 
years in the history of the United States that I know of to get labor. 
There was a big shortage of labor. I feel safe in saying that I do not 
believe there is an industry in the whole country but what was not 
crippled by the want of labor during those four years. I might say 
that there are over 30 passenger boats operating out of Detroit, and 
I do not know of one that was held up for one minute during those 
four years for the want of able seamen; not one for a minute, when 
every industry in the country was crying for labor. 

The statement has been made that the able seaman’s certificate is 
obtained from the sailors’ union. I want to say this: That on the 
Great Lakes I do not believe the able seamen are more than 65 or 70 
per cent organized. I might be giving Mr. Thorp a tip there. I 
presume he will go out with a spyglass looking for those who are 
not organized. 

I might also state that for years before the passage of the seamen’s 
act, that the sailors’ union has been organized since 1878; that is, on 
the Lakes. There have been periods when we were practically 100 
per cent organized long before the passage of the seamen’s act. From 
1900 to 1908 there were very few boats on the Lakes that did not carry 
100 per cent union men. There was no seamen’s law then. 

The Mackinaw Division is the division where the boats that have 
been operated always until this year are going to be withdrawn this 
season, and the reason given is the requirements of the seamen’s law. 
When the seamen’s law went into operation each of those boats had to 
put on one oiler and one water tender. On two boats they had to 
employ four more men. They were in the engineer’s department, 
men that were working in excessive heat, and the Congressmen here 
decided that men should not be called upon to work 84 hours a week 
under those conditions, but gave those men an 8-hour day and put 
on four more men on the two boats. That is all of the crew that was 
increased, just on two boats, those four men. They did not have to put 
a single able seaman more on than was there before. They formerly 
carried six able seamen and they still carry six able seamen. That is 
the requirement of the law. They carried nine last year, but that was 
a union regulation, an agreement between the sailors’ union and the 
company to give the sailors an 8-hour day ; but for the period, 1916, 
1917, 1918, and 1919 the six A. B’s were there before the law went 
into effect. 

Mr. Brigg. A. B. stands for able seamen? 

Mr. Nolan. Able seamen; yes, sir. Those boats ran four months 
last year. The cost of these two oilers and two water tenders 
would be approximately less than $2,500 for the two of them. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to say that, do you—that they ran for 

four months last year? _ 1 * mi 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir; that is all, four months that I know of. lhey 
did not run any more than that. 

Mr. Scott. They did not run as much as that. 

Mr. Nolan. How much? 


366 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. They ran three months. 

Mr. Nolan. I think you will find that they ran more than three 
months if you look it up. 

Mr. Scott. I do not have to look it up. I know. They started on 
the 15th of June and wound up on the 14th of September. 

Mr. Nolan. I was under the impression that they operated fox- 
four months. 

Mr. Scott. It helps the statement that you are giving it the in¬ 
terpretation, you are attempting to make. 

Mr. Nolan. That would have been lower on the $2,500 estimate? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. I have been told by the manager of the company that 
the boats cost $70,000. Mr. Conway said $50,000. I do not know 
which is true. That $2,000 approximately does not represent the dif¬ 
ference between profit and loss on those boats. If they lost $50,000 
or $70,000 the saving in expense of $2,000 is not going to put those 
boats back to operate. 

For the benefit of this committee I would like to make this sugges¬ 
tion, that if they can obtain from the management of the D. & C. Co., 
the company that operates those boats, a statement showing the 
amount of freight and the number of passengers carried per trip 
by those two boats for the past 10 years or 5 years, that they will 
find out that the business decreased, so that it was unprofitable to 
run them. I know that those boats were going into Detroit last year 
with very little freight on them. I know they carry deck hands and 
roustabouts to load and unload freight, and they had the life of Riley 
last } 7 ear; they had nothing to do. 

That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I would like the 
committee to ask me as many questions as they can. As I stated 
before I probably know a little more about it that might be brought 
out by questions. 

Mr. Bankhead. What is the difference in rating of life insurance, 
if any, demanded from seamen and those who work on land in a 
similar standard of labor, if you know ? 

Mr. Nolan. I knoAV that they are in some companies. I have a 
recollection of them being placed in what is known as— I do not know 
the term for it. 

Mr. Lazaro. Hazardous. 

Mr. Nolan. Hazardous, the same as the structural ironworkers. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do you know whether on this higher rate whether 
or not they are prohibitive in carrying life insurance because of the 
hazard ? If you do not know, do not make a statement. 

Mr. Nolan. I know that they are classed in what are called hazard¬ 
ous occupations. They do not get as cheap a rating as other occupa¬ 
tions, but just what difference there is I do not know. 

Mr. Gahn. You know that life insurance companies do not dis¬ 
criminate against passengers riding on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Nolan. I presume they figure that a passenger on the Great 
Lakes is there for a short time and not like a seaman who is there 
all the time. 

Mr. Gahn. I am figuring only from the standpoint of the Great 
Lakes. What is your suggestion, if you have any? I was not here 
when you talked about extending the time later in the fall and setting 
it ahead in the spring on the Great Lakes. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 367 

Mr. Nolan. I did not talk about that. 

Mr. Gahn. Do you object to that part of this bill? That is a 
question that, of course, affects the seamen, and if the traveling public 
have no objection, if they are willing to take those chances, I presume 
we will have to. It seems to me that a few weeks either way would 
not make very much difference; but, as I understand it, Congressman 
fecott wants to still amend his amendment so as to make it from the 
opening of navigation to the close of navigation. 

Mr. Gahn. So far as the present bill is concerned, you have no 
objection to that feature of it? 

Mr. Nolan. To this one; but I do think it is going too far to ex- 
^ rom opening of navigation to the close of navigation. 

Mr. Gahn. On page 7, the part of the bill you pointed out, you 
stated that there were some changes in the percentage of lifeboats, 
life-preserver equipment in the present law. Let me call your atten¬ 
tion to the fact that is only permissive and is not mandatory. It 
still has the supervision of the Government inspector, and they can 
increase it above the 50 per cent. 

Mr. Nolan. I do not think they can. 

Mr. Gahn. On page 7, at the bottom of the page, line 25, it says 
“ that during the interval May 1 to October 16,” etc. 

Mr. Bankhead. What page are you reading from? 

Mr. Gahn. Beginning at page 7*, at the bottom, line 20: 

The accommodations provided in lifeboats shall in every case be sufficient to 
accommodate at least 50 per cent of the persons on board. 

Then it goes on to say that the number and type of such lifeboats 
and life rafts shall be determined by the regulations of the Govern¬ 
ment officers. That is on page 7, beginning at line 22. 

Mr. Nolan (reading) : 

The accommodations provided in lifeboats shall be sufficient to accommodate 
at least 50 per cent of the persons on board. The number and type of such 
lifeboats and life rafts shall be determined by regulations of the Board of Su¬ 
pervising Inspectors, approved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

Mr. Gahn. In line 21, it says it shall be at least 50 per cent. Does 
not that amply protect the passengers where in any certain types of 
boats the Government official may require more than 50 per cent ? 

Mr. Nolan. They have never to my knowledge done so yet. There 
is no boat on the Lakes or either ocean that the inspectors have re¬ 
quired more than what the seamen’s law stated. 

Mr. Gahn. On page 8, line 14, it says they shall be required to 
carry accommodation for not less than 50 per cent of persons on 
board in lifeboats and pontoon rafts, leaving it discretionary with 
the United States officials in certain types of boats to require more, 
so that the change from the percentages would not be materially 
different, would it ? 

Mr. Nolan. Certainly, it would. 

Mr. Gahn. So far as safety on the Lakes is concerned? 

Mr. Nolan. The United States steamboat inspectors, to my knowl¬ 
edge, have never specified that the boat shall carry a greater life¬ 
saving equipment than what the law says. If the law cuts down the 
requirements, the inspector will cut it down. They have pever gone 
over what the law says, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Gahn. But they can. 


368 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Nolan. I can cut my finger off, but I am not going to do it. 

Mr. Gahn. Before they had any law at all, or this law, did not 
the Government officials require a certain percentage of lifeboats? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes; but not as much as the law requires. For in¬ 
stance, on salt water I believe the law was only one-third. 

Mr. Gahn. Here is my point. Why should Congress determine 
what the percentage should be in any case of a boat rather than the 
Government officials who are right on the spot inspecting that very 
boat? Does it not fully protect the passengers to have the Govern¬ 
ment officials who are presumed to know what is necessary on each 
boat to have them determine the percentage by a reasonable 
minimum ? 

Mr. Nolan. I might say, in answer to that question, that Gen. 
Uhler, head of the department of this inspection service, once stated— 
I can not quote his words, but that he believed that Congress should 
designate certain standards that the department could not go below. 
There is a great deal of pressure put on these inspectors. There can 
be a great deal of pressure put on them to make it higher or lower, 
and I believe that Congress should set some figures that they can not 
go below. 

Mr. Gahn. That is wdiat I believe, too, but I believe it should be 
reasonable. The D. & C. have some boats with several decks and on 
some parts of Lake Erie that I happen to be a little familiar with if the 
boats were submerged it would not submerge all the decks in most of 
the waters. 

Mr. Nolan. This law says that any vessel operating over a route 
where the water is not deep enough to submerge all of the vessel 
that the seamen’s law does not apply at all, but what the steamboat 
inspector prescribes. 

Mr. Scott. If it is within the 3-mile limit? 

Mr. Nolan. Within the 3-mile limit. 

Mr. Scott. Outside of the 3-mile limit where the decks will be 
submerged there is no provision. 

Mr. Hardy. It is where the decks would not be submerged under 
the existing law? 

Mr. Scott. But there is a different percentage required on a ship 
operating within the 3-mile limit and those operating outside of 
the 3-mile limit, -even in the event that the decks would not be 
submerged. 

Mr. Nolan. The seamen’s law does not apply to any passenger boat 
operating outside of the 3-mile limit over a route where the water 
is not deep enough to submerge all of the decks of the vessel. 

Mr. Scott. But you will admit—that is my insistence—that that 
provision is different than one applying entirely to ships operating 
within the 3-mile limit. Those ships would be purely excursion ships. 
The point is this, that in order to come within the purview of that 
provision any ship operating outside of the'3-mile limit, if in her 
course there was a spot where she had to go for five minutes over 
water that would submerge her decks and the balance of her entire 
course was in waters that would not submerge, she would not be 
excluded under the provisions of the act ? 

Mr. Nolan. You say certainly there could be cases like that, but 
then to exclude that boat as operating for five minutes over a spot 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 369 


deep enough to submerge would be to exclude boats operating all the 
time over deep water if we wanted to exclude them. 

Mr. Scott. My thought is this, that there are many instances 
where the law in a broad way covers the situation which assumes 
that the ship is constantly in water that would submerge her decks 
when in actual practice it is impossible. I say it is impossible, it is 
impracticable at least, to cover the natural conditions by general 
legislation. Ships are operating where 95 per cent of their time they 
are in waters that if the ships sunk it would be impossible to sink 
below her second deck. 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know of any such boat. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; I know of a number of them. 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know of any. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me make a suggestion. When this matter was 
being investigated by the committee at first certain instances were 
cited to the committee where vessels then running more than 3 miles 
offshore on the entire rout were in a depth that would not submerge 
all of the vessels; then they were exempted by the law, but the gen¬ 
eral provision that if they are not in water deep enough to submerge 
all of the vessel this law does apply. Whether there is a particular 
route that might have 5 per cent or five minutes of its run over such 
waters I do not know. 

Mr. Nolan. I know of none, either. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean exempted; they are limited. 

Mr. Hardy. I mean vessels traveling entirely over a route where 
the water was not deep enough to submerge all of the decks were ex¬ 
empted from the application of this law. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean exempted from the requirements, but 
lessened. 

Mr. Hardy. I think they are exempted. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to say that ships operating on the 
Great Lakes are entirely eliminated where their decks would not be 
submerged ? 

Mr. Hardy. Eliminated from the requirements that apply to the 
ships ? 

Mr. Scott. No ; not entirely eliminated. Every ship has to carry 
certain equipment. 

Mr. Hardy. They would carry life preservers. You do not want 
them exempted from everything? 

Mr. Scott. Not at all. 

Mr. Nolan. If I may be permitted, the seamen’s law and the life- 
saving equipment do not apply in any way to those ships. That is 
entirely left to the discretion of the steamboat inspector what equip¬ 
ment to put on them. 

Mr. Gahn. Your point is that the law ought not to have such a 
minimum of these safety devices—boats and rafts—on the majority 
of the boats on the Great Lakes that really do not need them, and 
o-et your minimum low enough so that then it is necessary to increase 
the percentage under the discretion of the Government officials. 

Mr. Nolan. How are we going to know what boats do not need 


them ? 

Mr. Gahn. The testimony we have heard here indicates that most 
of them on the Great Lakes do not need them. 


48420—21-24 


370 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Nolan. Our testimony? 

Mr. Gahn. Such a large percentage as fixed by the La Follette 
seamen’s act. 

Mr. Nolan. You claim that the present law is excessive in the limit 
of lifeboat equipment on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. Gahn. That is, the minimum. 

Mr. Nolan. The minimum in cold water, in the winter period, is 
100 per cent. I do not think that is too much to have on any boat. 
Give every man, woman, and child on the boat a chance for its life; 
100 per cent, that is 75 per cent boats and 25 per cent rafts. This 
law wants to change that division and make it 50 per cent boats, I 
presume, and 50 per cent rafts in the summer period, reducing the 
requirements that there shall be lifeboat equipment for boats run¬ 
ning over deep water more than 3 miles from shore for 50 per cent 
of the people on board. This law wants to cut that down to 25 per 
cent. I think the 50 per cent should be minimum. This amendment 
says 25 per cent is enough. I do not think so. I think that the bill 
should be extended to at least half of the people who should be enti¬ 
tled to a chance for their lives. The amendment says 25 per cent 
of the people. 

Mr. Hardy. In other words, this amendment would enable excur¬ 
sion boats to carry crowds with only 25 per cent provision for safety 
in case of passengers. 

Mr. Nolan. The present law is 50. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean the life belts, buoys, and life suits that 
they have carried voluntarily ? 

Mr. Nolan. What life suits? What life suits? I never heard 
nor have seen any. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean that? 

Mr. Nolan. I mean it. 

Mr. Scott. Did you ever travel on the D. & C. boats ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. You know that under every single berth there are 
always four life suits that you put on, made out of cork? 

Mr. Nolan. Life preservers? 

Mr. Scott. I mean life suits. Every single evening during the 
operation of these ships, you know that for one hour from 7 o’clock 
to 8, an employee on each one of those passenger boats holds a meet¬ 
ing in the cabin of the ship, advising the people how to put on the 
life suits. Don’t you know that to be the fact? You can answer 
that question yes or no. 

Mr. Hardy. If he wants to answer it, let him answer it. 

Mr. Nolan. You asked me if I did not know they carried life 
suits and life buoys. I never knew anything about life suits. I 
never heard of them. They do carry belts and preservers. I do not 
know what life suit means. The life preservers that you have refer¬ 
ence to must be provided for every passenger and the crew of every 
boat, but whether the life preservers will save your life or not I am 
not sure about that. Life preservers put on little children can drown 
them by tipping them over and floating them feet up. That has been 
proved. 

Mr. Hardy. Were you here during any of the investigations prior 
to the passage of the seamen’s law? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 371 

Mr. Nolan. I was sailing at that time. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not know then to what extent this whole sub¬ 
ject was gone into at that time? 

Mr. Nolan. This is my first time before any committee. 

Mr. Hardy. But you do know that prior to the passage of that law 
there was no law with regard to the standard of efficiency for the 
operation of these ships ? 

Mr. Nolan. Absolutely none. 

Mr. Hardy. And that there was no limit to the equipment except 
such as was prescribed by the inspectors ? 

Mr. Nolan. That is all. 

Mr. Hardy. This law was intended to fix at least a minimum in 
these respects? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Have you ever known the inspection service to require 
a different minimum ? 

Mr. Nolan. Never to my knowledge. I might state on that, re¬ 
garding able seamen, that is the standard of efficiency in the crew. 
This proposed amendment wants to do away with that altogether by 
reducing it to 25. It proposes to substitute certificated lifeboats 
manned with able seamen, to do away altogether with the able sea¬ 
men examination, the certificate, as they call it. The present law 
requirement is that a man must serve his 18 months on deck and then 
get his certificate, as we call it, from the Department of Commerce, 
through the steamboat inspector. 

Mr. Mills. Does he become an able seaman in 18 months? 

Mr. Nolan. They go on this presumption—that a man who has 
served 18 months on the deck must have absorbed some of the knowl¬ 
edge necessary to enable him to become an able seaman. 

Mr. Mills. I thought it was three years. 

Mr. Nolan. Three years on salt water and 18 months on the Lakes. 
As I stated, the provisions of the seamen’s law are not so strict on 
the Lakes as on salt water. 

Mr. Hardy. As a matter of fact, the question was raised by the 
Lake people, and we reduced the requirements in the bill on the 
Lakes from 3 years to 18 months. 

Mr. Mills. Don’t you think that a man, for instance, who makes a 
voyage on a deep-sea ship lasting six months on a sailing vessel is 
more likely to come back an able seaman than a man who spends 12 
months on a passenger vessel on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. Nolan. He would be a better all around seaman, yes, sir; and 
then he would have to become accustomed to passenger boats. The 
work is different on all of them. For instance, on the Great Lakes 
we have every year a large influx of salt-water men, and the first 
few months they are up there, the first six or eight months amongst 
themselves, they are rather looked upon as not being quite as good 
men as the men raised on the Lakes and sailed there all the time, be¬ 
cause conditions are different. 

Mr. Mills. But if they have sailed for three years on salt water 
they are able seamen and' they are listed as such when they go to the 

Lakes. _ , . 

Mr. Nolan. I mean to say they can not steer as good, that is one 
of the main requirements on the Lakes. They do not know the 


372 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

rivers and courses and can not steer a steamboat. When it comes to 
pulling an oar, probably they are a little better. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to lead Mr. Mills to believe that the 
ordinary seaman on the Great Lakes ship participate to any per¬ 
ceptible degree in steering of a ship, do you ? 

Mr. Nolan. On a great many ships they do, and on a great many 
ships on the Lakes the ordinary seamen are called in. That is their 
job. I do not know that it happens on passenger boats, because pas¬ 
senger boats do not want to take chances with lives and property 
intrusted to them, but on the freight boats the ordinary seamen, 
nearly all of them, do some operating during the day or night, 
getting a little time at the wheel. Then the passenger boats in a 
great many cases draw their wheelsmen from the freight boats. 

Mr. Gahn. That does not require any great skill to steer a boat 
on the Great Lakes. Half a day’s experience would be sufficient at 
the wheel. They could learn all that is necessary to operate and 
steer a boat on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Nolan. Not in half a day. You could not learn it in three 
years. 

Mr. Gahn. But you could learn to sound a channel and learn to 
steer with the steering apparatus within a few hours. 

Mr. Nolan. You would not learn to be a competent wheelsman in 
three years. 

Mr. Scott. Have you ever acted as a wheelsman on a ship ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. We will leave Port Huron, going north on our way; 
we will assume the longest possible run. We are on our way from 
Buffalo to Duluth. We are leaving Port Huron, taking it across 
from the lightship down to the outside of Port Huron, 7 miles out¬ 
side of Port Huron. 

Mr. Nolan. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Where do you change your course again to hold 
almost to the northeast, cross around, and going north ? 

Mr. Nolan. It all depends on weather conditions. If I want to 
keep in shore- 

Mr. Scott. I am talking about the ordinary course. 

Mr. Nolan. But weather conditions vary every time. They are 
never the same. 

Mr. Scott. You and I agreed on that this morning. When you 
leave Port Huron you take your course for what point ? 

Mr. Nolan. Generally for Sand Beach. 

Mr. Scott. Sand Beach is how far from Port Huron? 

Mr. Nolan. Sixty miles. 

Mr. Scott. Your course will be between the light ship off of Port 
Huron and that off of Sand Beach. 

Mr. Nolan. Sometimes you do; sometimes you do not. 

Mr. Scott. Ordinarily. 

Mr. Nolan. Ordinarily you do not. 

Mr. Scott. Do you then change your course there ? 

Mr. Nolan. You change; then the ship will course for Thunder 
Bay Island light. 

Mr. Scott. How far is Thunder Bay Island light from the harbor 
port light? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 373 

Mr. Nolan. It must be 80 to 90 miles. 

Mr. Scott. When you get to Thunder Bay, do you change your 
course more ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Where do you change to from there ? 

Mr. Nolan. Irom Thunder Bay Island to head across up Detour. 

Mr. Scott. How far do you go then on that course? 

Mr. Nolan. From Detour? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. You go up the river from Detour. 

Mr. Scott. When you get to Thunder Bay Island, don't you take 
your course to Middle Island, miles away? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. And when you get to Middle Island change your course 
again—you are going to Detour; change your course again and you 
put your course to East BoboloAV light, which is at the south end 
of Bobolow Island. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Nolan. What I meant to say is this: Do you mean to tell me 
that the wheelsman makes all those courses ? 

Mr. Scott. No; I am simply showing you can steer the course 
absolutely accurate with the compass. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do I understand that you agree that the ordinary 
seaman is not competent to act as wheelsman ? 

Mr. Scoit. No. 

Mr. Bankhead. I do not understand the object of your inquiry. 

Mr. Scott. The object of my inquiry is this, that it is not a diffi¬ 
cult thing to act as a wheelsman on a ship on the Great Lakes with 
practice, and they do so, but on a passenger ship it is really quite a 
job to be a wheelsman. That is my sole purpose, and I did not 
want the inference to be drawn by members of the committee that 
they were changing their course every few moments, because they 
held their course 60 and 90 miles and then changed it. 

Mr. Nolan. Do you mean to give the committee the impression 
that the man has held the wheel just 60 miles? 

Mr. Scott. Just on the compass. 

Mr. Nolan. Steers the boat 60 miles? 

Mr. Scott. Steers it on the compass. 

Mr. Nolan. Changing courses—that is one of the easiest things the 
wheelsman has to do. All he has to do is to change the course. 

Mr. Gahn. Agreeing that it would be better from a safety stand¬ 
point and from the standpoint of navigating a boat to have 65 
per cent of the seamen able-bodied seamen, as you call them, in 
cases where they are unable to obtain that 65 per cent, what objec¬ 
tion, if any, is there to having certified lifeboat men take their places, 
say, so that they have still 25 per cent or more of able seamen, or any 
percentage less than 65 per cent ? 

Mr. Nolan. I have never known of passenger boats on the Lakes 
held up or delayed one minute from departing because they could not 
get able seamen together. 

Mr. Gahn. Suppose they were held up ? 

Mr. Nolan. In the last five years the hardest time in the history 
of the country to get labor, they have never been held up. I do not 
see how they could fail to get them. 


374 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Gahn. On the supposition they were unable to get them, 
what objection would there be to certified lifeboats with a limit on 
the percentage of able-bodied seamen ? 

Mr. Nolan. I will tell you my objection, if you put it in the law, 
that they will not look for able seamen. They will make no effort 
to find them, and consequently they will not have them. 

Mr. Gahn. Suppose there is a provision in law that they must 
make an effort to find them, furnishing satisfactory proof that they 
could not obtain them. 

Mr. Nolan. The present law requires this—that if they look for 
them and can not find them they are allowed to depart without them, 
but they have to make a report of it. 

Mr. Gahn. That makes some delay. 

Mr. Nolan. To make a report? 

Mr. Gahn. They have to get permission under the present law to 
sail. 

Mr. Nolan. They may depart and at the first port they arrive at 
after departing they can make a report. 

Mr. Mills. Were the provisions of the seamen’s act suspended 
during the war ? 

Mr. Nolan. No ; not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Mills. At any time ? 

Mr. Nolan. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Mills. Are you xamiliar with the Canadian law with refer¬ 
ence to able seamen ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know that they have any law regarding able 
seamen. Iam not familiar with the Canadian law. I never heard if 
they had. 

Mr. Mills. Have you ever heard that Canadian boats were re¬ 
quired to carry a certain percentage of able seamen? 

Mr. Nolan. No, sir. 

Mr. Mills. Are you at all familiar with British law on this sub¬ 
ject? 

Mr. Nolan. Iam not. I never sailed only on the Lakes. 

Mr. Mills. Is your chief objection to this bill the one referring 
to the able seamen? 

Mr. Nolan. I have about three objections to the bill. 

Mr. Mills. I am asking you which is your main objection. 

Mr. Nolan. I have two main objections. 

Mr. Mills. The two-watch proposition and the able seamen? 

Mr. Nolan. The two-watch proposition does not affect me or my 
men at all. That affects Mr. Conway, who is to speak on that. 

Mr. Mills. Yes; I know that. 

Mr. Nolan. My objections, of course, are the substitution of certi¬ 
ficated lifeboat men in the place of able seamen and lessening the 
requirements as to life-saving equipment. Those are my two objec¬ 
tions. 

Mr. Mills. As to the second objection, you stated you have no real 
objection to the lengthening of the time to the extra four weeks? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. So that your real objection to the bill refers to the 65 
per cent provision. 

Mr. Nolan. No ; there are three- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 375 

Mr. Mills. I am not trying to pin you down to saying if that were 
ehmmated you would accept the bill. I know you would not. 

Mr. Nolan. That is not what I am trying to do. This bill also 
lowers the amount of life-saving equipment they have to carry at all 
times. 

Mr. Mills. I understand that. 

Mr. Nolan. I am opposing that absolutely. 

Mr. Mills. Now, on this seaman’s proposition, the 65 per cent, 
leaving all other considerations out of it, to reduce that would be a 
very disadvantageous change so far as your union is concerned, 
would it not? 

Mr. Nolan. Not that I know of. We had a stronger union before 
that law passed than we have ever had since. 

Mr. Mills. But you did not have the same number of men avail¬ 
able for service on ships before, did you ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not get your meaning. 

Mr. Mills. Are not there more men on ships to-day and available 
for manning the American merchant marine than there were in 
1913? 

Mr. Nolan. I believe so; yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. I am asking you a perfectly frank question, if you 
■take away the three year limitation- 

Mr. Nolan. Eighteen months on the Lakes. 

Mr. Mills. If you take away the 18 months’ limitation with refer¬ 
ence to the able seamen’s proposition, would not that, from the stand¬ 
point of your union, be a serious proposition ? 

Mr. Nolan. Not that I know of. I can not see why it should be. 

Mr. Mills. Now, let us see. Supposing you go on strike, for 
instance; under the law to-day no company could replace the strik¬ 
ing men unless they could find men who had served for three years. 

Mr. Nolan. Eighteen months. 

Mr. Mills. Or 18 months. I am thinking of the ocean proposi¬ 
tion. Is that so ? 

Mr. Nolan. Well, they have to find- 

Mr. Mills. Men who have served for at least three years. 

Mr. Nolan. Eighteen months. They would have to find men who 
had served for at least 18 months. 

Mr. Mills. Now, if you remove this restriction and there is a 
serious disagreement between your unions and the steamship owners, 
why, they have an almost unlimited supply of men to draw from, 
have they not? 

Mr. Nolan. That unlimited supply of men would presumably be 
men of very little experience. 

Mr. Mills. Oh, all right- 

Mr. Nolan. Would you care to have a boat operated by that kind 
of men ? 

Mr. Mills. I am not expressing an opinion. I asked you a per¬ 
fectly frank question, and I got a somewhat disingenuous answer. 

Mr. Hardy. Is not that really a question for this committee to work 
out when it comes to consider the bill? 

Mr. Mills, I am asking the question whether they have a private 
and selfish interest. . 

Mr. Nolan. We, had a strike this spring and lost it, even with the 

law. 



376 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Mills. You might lose it with the law, and you might win it 
without the law. 

Mr. Nolan. I will answer it that way. It was on passenger boats, 
too. 

Mr. Mills. Honestly, as a matter of fact, doesn’t it strengthen your 
hand to have this three-year provision, from the union’s standpoint ? 

Mr. Nolan. You mean the 18 months’ provision? 

Mr. Mills. Yes. I apologize to you for continually making that 
mistake. Doesn’t it strengthen your hand to have the 18 months’ 
provision ? 

Mr. Nolan. Presumably; I would say it might in case of a strike. 
But we never have had a general strike on the Lakes; that is, since 
1909. The only men ever called on strike on the Lakes since that 
time, to my knowledge, were on eight boats. 

Mr. Mills. So that, according to you, from the union’s standpoint, 
the 18 months’ provision does not interest you at all ? 

Mr. Nolan. It interests me in this way, that our men have to do 
the actual work aboard ship, and if they are forced to sail with an 
unskilled man, they have to do part of that man’s work. If that man 
is not skilled, it makes their job harder; it makes their job more 
dangerous. 

Mr. Mills. But aside from that, your organization has no other 
interest in the change? Your only interest here is in the interest of 
the public? 

Mr. Nolan. In the interest of the public? No; we have a selfish 
interest. We not only have the interest of the public but a selfish in¬ 
terest to raise the standard of skill amongst our own men. In other 
words, you take a plumber; he does not like to work with a novice 
that had never done the work, because he would have to do his work. 
And if a bricklayer has to work with a novice, he does not like to do 
it, because he would have to do his work. 

Mr. Mills. Let me ask you this : Supposing a test, applying to any 
man to be rated as an able seaman, and for two days he was tested 
out in every one of the duties which he would have to perform—a 
thoroughly competent examination—would you people agree to that 
change for a substitute for the three-year provision ? 

Mr. Nolan. Who is going to do tiie testing, Mr. Congressman? 

Mr. Mills. Government examiners. 

Mr. Nolan. Well, that sounds nice; it listens nice; but Govern¬ 
ment examiners—there can be pressure brought to bear on Govern¬ 
ment examiners. 

Mr. Hardy. That would be the condition you had when it was all 
left to the inspection service ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you think it is a matter of any concern to the 
public whether they have experienced men manning the ship, where 
their lives are at stake, or whether they have green, inexperienced 
men? 

Mr. Nolan. That is the main reason - 

Mr. Briggs. Just answer that question, yes or no. 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you think it is of any consequence to the members 
of the crew whether they have green, inexperienced men working 
with them or experienced men ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 377 

Mr. Nolan. Why, it is a big consequence. They would sooner be 
working with the experienced men. 

Mr. Briggs. The lives of the crew are as dear to them as the lives 
of the public ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And the lives of the public are as dear to them as the 
life of any man on shipboard? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. When vessels get in distress, is everybody calm and 
collected on board ship ? 

Mr. Nolan. I was only in one wreck in my life. Of course, it was 
not a passenger boat. It was a lumber hooker. As my recollection 
goes, the majority of us were calm and collected, with the exception 
of an ordinary seaman, who had only been on the boat about two 
months and a fireman who had only been there about the same length 
of time. They became so seasick and so frightened that one of them 
laid down on deck, up near the forward house, and he was supposed 
to be on watch at the time in the firehold. Another fireman, who had 
been firing for a number of years, had to go down and do his work. 
This fellow came up there hollering to the captain about wanting 
to get ashore. Of course, there was no use wanting to get ashore, 
because you could not. He laid down on the deck with his arm on 
a hot steam pipe, and did not have enough energy to remove his arm 
from the steam pipe and was burned all along his arm. 

Mr. Mills. Three years at sea would not have helped that boob. 
[Laughter.] 

Mr. Nolan. That man was so sick he did not care whether he lived 
or died. 

Mr. Briggs. Don't you think three years’ experience on a ship helps 
to develop coolness and clearheadedness and to avoid a panicky con¬ 
dition ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Just the same as it is with troops? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. Just the same as it is with firemen who perform their 
duties ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. And just the same as it is with the police force that is 
trained? 

Mr. Nolan. Absolutely. 

Mr. Briggs. Is it not a requirement, for instance, in a great many 
metropolitan cities like New York, that they have a great long train¬ 
ing for the men before they perform police duties or do you knoAv 
anything about that? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know anything about that. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you not think the better men are the men who have 
been trained and who have been given experience under some of the 
actual conditions they have to face during the time they are being 
trained ? 

Mr. Nolan. My experience in life- 

Mr. Briggs. Just answer that yes or no, if you know? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not get your question. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you not think men trained and given experience 
under some of the actual conditions they have to meet, make better 


378 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

men in the service than when they are just trained without this ex¬ 
perience in the conditions they have to face, while the training is 
going on? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. My experience has been the practical man, 
the man who is experienced, is the most skilled man. You can not 
get knowledge out of books. You have to have practical experience. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you think those men are more valuable to the 
ships and to the public generally than the other classes of men ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. You think for work in certain special classes of hazard 
that they are better than other classes of men? 

Mr. Nolan. They are absolutely indispensable then. 

Mr. Hardy. This seamen’s bill was passed in 1915 ? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. At that time it required the percentage of able seamen 
in the deck crew to be, for the first year, 40 per cent; second year, 45 
per cent; third year, 50 per cent; then 55 per cent and, after that, 
65 per cent. Now, this bill comes along and reenacts that provision 
and makes it go into effect as of the date of the passage of the act, 
so that it gets back to the 40 per cent we began with. 

Mr. Nolan. This law does not require the Lakes to carry any able 
seamen. That is the ocean. 

Mr. Hardy. I am speaking of this provision here which is intended 
to amend section 13 > that no vessel of 100 tons gross and upward ” 
shall leave port unless it has that percentage, and the 40 per cent 
amendment begins after the passage of the law. 

Mr. Nolan. My understanding of that provision is this, that on 
the ocean it reduces the present 65 per cent required to 40 per cent 
and starts to work up then to the 65 per cent, and it exempts the 
Lakes entirely from any able seamen at all. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the point I am trying to get at; it starts back 
at the 40 per cent. 

Mr. Nolan. That is it. 

Mr. Hardy. There may be some question as to whether that is 
true or not, because it amends existing law; but, if it is not true, 
then there is no use of putting that schedule in here. It looks like 
it would give them the right to go back and to start, even on the 
ocean, with the 40 per cent of able seamen. 

Mr. Nolan. That is true. 

Mr. Hardy. Another thing: Under the existing law, on the Lakes, 
18 months is the extreme requirement of service to enable a man to 
claim title as an A. B. 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. I want it to be understood also that upon examination, 
under rules prescribed by the Department of Commerce, as to eye¬ 
sight, hearing, and physical condition, such persons or graduates 
found to be competent may, after 12 months—graduates of certain 
institutions—be given the rating of able seamen. The law reads: 

That upon examination, under rules prescribed by the Department of Com¬ 
merce as to eyesight, hearing, and physical condition, and knowledge of the 
duties of seamanship, a person found competent may be rated as able seaman 
after having served on deck 12 months at sea or on the Great Lakes. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 379 

So that under the law now a man may be rated as an able seaman 
if he is bright and efficient, even though he has not served but 12 
months at sea or on the Lakes. But there is a condition to that- 

Mr. Nolan. Twenty-five per cent. 

Mr. Hardy (continuing). That only 25 per cent of the entire able 
seamen crew shall be of the 12 months’ t} r pe. So that now you have 
an opportunity to get men who have served on the Lakes or on the 
ocean for only 12 months, for service on the ships, if they are com¬ 
petent ? 

Mr. Nolan. That is true. 

Mr. Hardy. Men who have gone through these schools, having 
served 12 months, if they are competent, or men who have served 18 
months on the Lakes or at sea, can be rated as able seamen. Was not 
that requirement as to the Lakes and the overseas requirement put in 
at the request and urgent insistence of the great body of representa¬ 
tives of the lake and boating interests, when this bill was up before ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know who urged it, but that is the law. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the law now ? 

Mr. Nolan. A man can serve 12 months on deck any place in the 
world—it is not necessary for that service to be on the Lakes—and 
if he passes a seamanship examination he can obtain his able seaman’s 
certificate for the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Hardy. Did not you bring in testimony at the public hearings 
tending to show the hardships that were imposed on crews in the 
Lake service, prior to the passage of this act, in long hours ? 

Mr. Nolan. I might state that I started myself as a deck hand, and 
that I have worked—the first boat I was on, I went on watch at mid¬ 
night and worked from midnight until 6 in the morning on watch. 
I was off watch from 6 in the morning until noon, on from noon 
until 6 o’clock, and then off until midnight. That is the meaning of 
on watch and off watch. You are 12 hours per day on watch and 12 
hours per day off watch. In the time off watch you have to wash 
up, eat your meals, change your clothes, etc. Out in the Lakes I 
was passing coal and only worked 12 hours per day, with the excep¬ 
tion of when we came to what we call the Soo, when we had to get 
up, whether we were on watch or off watch, and handle the necessary 
lines to handle the boats to go through the locks at that point. Then 
we would continue on our journey up Lake Superior and only work 
12 hours per day on that journey. When we arrived in port at the 
upper end of the Lakes, it might happen this way, that the boat 
would get in at 6 o’clock in the morning; I had been working from 
midnight. We would then work all that day, painting or doing other 
necessary work aboard that ship—unnecessary work, we used to call 
it. Maybe at 6 o’clock that night the boat, when it would come time 
for us to quit painting, and so on, would start to load. Then we- 
would have to be up all the time the boat was loading. It might 
happen she would load in five or six hours and be fully loaded by 
midnight and go out in the Lake again. I did not get any rest. I 
went down in the fire hold and passed coal for six more hours. In 
other words, I would work from midnight until 6 o’clock the day 
following; that is, I would work 30 hours on a stretch without sleep 
and no definite time off. 


380 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

That was common practice on nearly all boats. It sounds in¬ 
human. And we are told down here that the vessel owners have 
wings; or, that is, we are given that impression that they are angels; 
that they would not do this or would not do that. But, nevertheless, 
the same men who were operating the boats and putting those work¬ 
ing conditions into effect, practically, a lot of them are the same men 
who are still operating the boats. 

Mr. Mills. Does this proposed bill change that situation ? 

Mr. Nolan. No ; this amendment does not change the present law 
on that question at all. 

Mr. Mills. It leaves the seamen just where they are now? 

Mr. Nolan. It leaves the coal passers and deck hands just where 
they are now; that is, the coal passer can not work on deck and the 
deck hand can not work as a coal passer. 

Mr. Mills. It leaves the seamen just where they are? 

Mr. Nolan. Absolutely no. You say it leaves the seamen just 
where they are? You mean the able seamen? 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. It takes away any requirement as to whether they shall 
have the certificated able seamen or not. 

Mr. Mills. I know that; but I mean as to hours of work. 

Mr. Nolan. It is just the same there as to hours of work. For 
instance, it would restore the condition in effect prior to the passage 
of the seaman’s act. As Mr. Scott told me yesterday, his first duty 
on a ship was that of lookout. That is one of the skilled positions in 
the deck department, or supposedly one of the skilled positions in 
the deck department. I just cite that to prove that a man, whether 
he has had any experience on a boat or not, could ship as one of those 
skilled men in the able seamen’s crew; that is, in the position of 
lookout. And Mr. Scott told me yesterday he first shipped as a 
lookout. He could not do that under the present law; he would have 
to serve a certain length of time aboard ship. 

Mr. Mills. But you were describing the length of time you had to 
work prior to the passage of the law. Mr. Scott’s bill does not in 
any way restore those conditions, so far as length of time is con¬ 
cerned ? 

Mr. Nolan. No ; not a bit. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you two more questions, and I am 
still harping on the three-year provision. Did not we turn out not 
only able seamen, but did not we turn out pretty good naval officers 
after three months’ training, during the war ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know that we turned out the naval officers 
after only three months’ training; I never heard of it. That may 
be so. 

Mr. Mills. That is so; and they were pretty good naval officers, 
too. But you did not know it, so I won’t question you any further 
on that. You did not .seem to attach any importance to this examina¬ 
tion suggestion of mine; you seem to think that an examination 
would not be a very good test. 

Mr. Nolan. What I would like to see, Mr. Congressman, is an 
examination and then some practical experience. I would like to see 
a man have to put in a certain length of time and then also be ex¬ 
amined as to seamanship. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 381 

Mr. Mills. So that you think an examination could be made to 
reveal whether a man was a competent seaman or not ? 

Mr. Nolan. That is a hard thing to do. A man might read up on 
a book and absorb some theoretical knowledge and have no practical 
experience at all; he might absorb some of this book knowledge and 
be able to answer questions. 

Mr. Mills. But you would not test a seaman by a written examina¬ 
tion would you ? 

Mr. Nolan. I suppose he would be asked questions. 

Mr. Mills. You do not think he would be made to perform the 
actual duties of an ordinary able seaman? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not think so, because the equipment necessary to 
determine that would be expensive, and you can not determine it any¬ 
way only at sea. 

Mr. Mills. Supposing we did determine it; supposing the United 
States Government furnished the apparatus to give an absolutely 
practical test of whether a man could perform the duties of an able 
seaman. Under those circumstances would you be willing to waive 
the 18 months? 

Mr. Nolan. I would not; I think a man should have some practical 
experience. I do not see how a man could be an able seaman without 
having gone to sea. He can not learn it out of books; he can not 
learn it on shore. 

Mr. Mills. Then probably he could not pass this examination. 

Mr. Nolan. I think it is all useless. 

Mr. Mills. Supposing you take him out on the boats and he is 
made to do everything, some of the things our friend Mr. O’Brien 
described here yesterday—splice ropes, lower boats, test his eyesight* 
and ability as a lookout, make him swing over the side of the boat 
and paint the side of the ship, make him rig a jury rudder—all of 
which could be done on the boat—and suppose you found he could do 
all those things, do you think he should receive a certificate as an 
able seaman or not? 

Mr. Nolan. You are asking a question it is impossible to answer. 
A man to be able to do that must hawe had some time at sea. 

Mr. Mills. Of course. But if he were able to do all those things, 
would you be willing to rate him as an able seaman and not impose 
the 3-}^ear or 18-months provision ? 

Mr. Nolan. I think he could not learn all that in less than a year 
or 18 months. That is the provision on the Lakes now. I would be 
very glad to have such an examination and also to show he has 
served on deck—very glad. But he could not learn to do all that 
without some sea experience. 

Mr. Hardy. Does not this very provision, reducing the time to 12 
months, meet the matter suggested by Mr. Mills, if he is found to 
be an especially bright and competent man? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Davis. If a man’s qualifications can be determined alone by 
examination, do you know why it is New York and practically all 
the other States require three or four years’ intensive study before 
a man is permitted even to stand an examination, for admission to 
the bar, to practice medicine, dentistry, engineering, and the various 
other professions? 


382 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Nolan. You must remember I - 

Mr. Davis. I will ask you if it is not a fact that all of those require¬ 
ments are based upon the recognized general knowledge that a man’s 
fitness and his qualifications to practice or engage in those profes¬ 
sions or vocations can not he determined simply by an examination? 

Mr. Nolan. I suppose that is the way; I do not know anything 
about law. I have heard the word and that is all I know about it. 
I am not a laAvyer. 

Mr. Mills. You are lucky. 

Mr. Briggs. You were asked a moment ago as to whether or not 
naval officers, competent naval officers, were turned out in three 
months. I think you stated you did not know. Do you know whether 
the United States is still conducting a training school at its Naval 
Academy and requiring four years’ study to turn out naval officers, 
and has not even reduced the time to three years there ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know that, either. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Is there a union among the ordinary seamen and 
certificated lifeboat men? 

Mr. Nolan. I will go into it rather extensively. The unions on the 
Lakes- 

Mr. Kirkpatrick (interposing). I think perhaps Mr. Furuseth 
can do that better. I am only asking you whether there is a union 
or not ? 

Mr. Nolan. Among the certificated lifeboat men? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. The certificated lifeboat man may be drawn from any 
department of the ship. He can be in. the steward’s crew or the en¬ 
gineer’s crew or the deck crew, or he can be an engineer or a captain 
or mate, and so on. Now, a large number of the certificated lifeboat 
men come from the steward’s department. The rates of pay in the 
steward’s department vary. For instance, an able seaman last year 
was receiving wages of $125 per month. He was the skilled sailor. 
A large number of certificated lifeboat men were in the steward’s 
department. A large number, the vast majority of the men in the 
steward’s department at the port of Detroit—I was there last year— 
received about $44 per month. They were flunkies of all descrip¬ 
tions—window washers, dishwashers, scrubbers, linen-room boys, and 
so on. The steward’s department must have had a crew of 150, prob¬ 
ably; I do not know just how many in the steward’s department 
alone. Out of that there would be one steward, one chef, and some 
cooks. The chef would be of some assistance to do the actual cook¬ 
ing, but the rest of them were mainly bell boys, dishwashers, and 
so on—$44 a month help. There were some of those men who had 
lifeboat certificates. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. What I want to know is what percentage of your 
men on the ship, outside of the able seamen, are unionized? Can you 
give us any idea ? 

Mr. Nolan. On all ships? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Give us some idea on the Lakes. 

Mr. Nolan. Passenger ships? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Any ships. 

Mr. Nolan. What percentage of the sailors? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Yes; what per cent of the employees on the 
Lakes are unionized. Fifty per cent, do you think? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 383 

Mr. Nolan. On all ships? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Yes: on the Lakes. 

Mr. Nolan. No ; not 50 per cent. 

Mr. Mills. Y ou will have to exclude the Steel Corporation ships 
if you want to get any fair idea. 

Mr. Scott. This bill is limited to passenger ships. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Limit it to passenger ships. What percentage 
of the employees on the passenger ships not able seamen belong to 
unions ? 

Mr. Nolan. I will state this, that the majority of the firemen, oil¬ 
ers, and water tenders belong. 

Mr. Hardy. May I put in right there that the servants at the table 
on the boat on which we went across the Pacific were young boys 
just taking their first trip over those waters, and I do not reckon they 
belonged to the union, and I guess they change very frequently on 
the passenger boats. 

Mr. Nolan. The able seamen and probably the firemen, oilers, and 
water tenders are organized- 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. About 60 per cent? 

Mr. Nolan. On all the boats on the Lakes? 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. A little more than that; between 60 and 70 per cent. 
And the other department—the steward’s department—I would not 
estimate it to be more than 40 per cent organized. 

Mr. Mills. Are not the passenger boats completely unionized ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know what you mean by completely unionized. 
Even with sailors, the able seamen on the boats, that are supposed to 
be 100 per cent organized—even if the owners would agree to carry 
nothing but union men—there are lots of times men on board who do 
not belong to the union, but afterwards go into the union. 

Mr. Mills. Accidents happen; but as a general proposition is it not 
a fact the boats on the Lakes to-day are unionized? 

Mr. Nolan. No, sir. I have been told there are four boats that 
have discontinued service around Kellys Island. I never heard of it. 
They can not be unionized, or I would know of it. There are two 
boats operating at the Straits of Mackinac- 

Mr. Mills. Are they operating? 

Mr. Nolan. They have been discontinued. They were never union¬ 
ized. 

Mr. Mills. I am asking you about boats that are operating. Of 
course, boats laid up at the dock are neither open-shop boats nor 
union boats. 

Mr. Nolan. You misunderstand; I mean they never had been 
unionized when they were running. 

Mr. Mills. So far as you know there may be boats that are not 
unionized? That is your answer? 

Mr. Nolan. I have learned down here of some that I did not know 
existed. 

Mr. Mills. Before you came down here you were under the im¬ 
pression the passenger boats on the Lakes were completely union¬ 
ized? 

Mr. Nolan. Not completely. 

Mr. Mills. I say accidents happen. 


384 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Nolan. No. I mean boats we had no men on, to my knowl¬ 
edge. 

Sir. Mills. Passenger boats? 

Mr. Nolan. Passenger boats. 

Mr. Mills. Name one. 

Mr. Nolan. There is the Hill Line out of Chicago. The'way I 
know about it is this: Mr. Little, business agent in Chicago for the 
marine cooks and steward’s union, came into my office and told me— 
he did not come in to tell me that especially, but he came into my 
office and, incidentally, he told me he was going to sign up a con¬ 
tract with a line of passenger boats. I asked him what line it was 
and he told me the Hill boats, if I am not mistaken. As I was a 
stranger in Chicago, had just been newly elected secretary and taken 
up my office there, I asked whether they had our men on the boats 
and he told me no. 

Mr. Mills. I understand the able seamen on the Great Lakes all 
belong to unions. 

Mr. Nolan. The best estimate I can make is they are 60 to TO 
per cent organized and 30 to 40 per cent unorganized. 

Mr. Mills. That is on the passenger boats? 

Mr. Nolan. No; on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Mills. You are including the steel corporation boats? 

Mr. Nolan. You have to. 

Mr. Mills. That is where you get your 30 per cent. As far as the 
passenger boats are concerned on the Great Lakes, is it not true that 
all the able seamen are organized? 

Mr. Nolan. Not all of them. I just got through telling you of a 
line of boats that do not carry our men at all. 

Mr. Scott. What boats? 

Mr. Nolan. The Hill boats. 

Mr. Scott. How many are there? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know. 

Mr. Scott. There is one, and it is owned by the captain and en¬ 
gineer. 

Mr. Nolan. I told you I had never heard of the boat until Mr. 
Little came in and told me he was going down to sign up a contract. 

(The committee thereupon took a recess until 2 o’clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. 

The committee reassembled pursuant to the taking of the recess, 
Hon. William S. Greene (chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF MR. K. B. NOLAN—Resumed. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you completed your testimony ? 

Mr. Nolan. No, sir; I have not. My impression is this: In these 
hearings I have heard so far that there"have been no passenger boats 
lost on the Great Lakes. I do not know whether I am correct in that 
or not. I have not had time to look it up and get definite informa¬ 
tion as to how many were lost, but in reading some of the old testi¬ 
mony when the hearings on this bill were had- 

Mr. Briggs. Give the date of it. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, IB, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 385 

Mr. Nolan. The title of it is “ Seamen’s bill hearings held before 
the C ommittee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of 
Representatives. Hearings of December 13, 15, 16, IT, 18, and 19, 
1913. On page 343 a Mr. Thatcher asked Mr. Morton these ques¬ 
tions. Mr. Morton was manager or president of the Graham & 
Morton Line. He was an owner, I presume, of it. That is the same 
line about which there was testimony before this committee the other 
day, the line that had not paid a dividend since 1874, I believe it was. 
Mr. Thatcher asked the question, “Did you lose a boat 15 years ago 
between Chicago and Benton Harbor? And the answer was: 

Mr. Morton. No; between Chicago and Holland. 

Mr. Man a han. Wliat was the name of the vessel? 

Mr. Morton. The Milwaukee. 

Mr. Thatcher. Was there not a boat lost between Chicago and St. Joseph 
or Benton Harbor about 15 years ago, or since that time,? 

Mr. Morton. There was. It was a long while ago, however. The steamer 
j Hippocampus left with a load of fruit, went out from St. Joseph about 11 
o’clock at night, and a sharp summer squall came up. It made quite a sea for 
several hours, but not a stormy sea, and that in some way wrecked the vessel. 
They claimed she went down on her side and tilled with water and went down, 
and her upper works, the light structure of her cabin, was raised off; and out 
of about 75 or SO there were, I think, 39 saved on this raft, if you may call it so, 
made out of the cabin of that steamer. 

That is two boats that have gone down. 

Mr. Scott. When did thev go down; does it say there ? 

Mr. N olan. It does not say when they went down. It says about 
15 years ago. 

Mr. Scott. One was in the summer and the other in the fall. 

Mr. Nolan. One was in the summer. It says so distinctly. It says 
a summer squall came up. 

Mr. Scott. It does not give the time? 

Mr. Nolan. No; but it says “ a summer squall.” And it says some 
39 were saved out of 75 or 80, on some raft the} 7 made or built out of 
the superstructure of the boat. 

Then, on page 345: 

Mr. Manahan. You did not tell us what happened to the Chicora. 

Mr. Morton. The Chicora was caught in a blizzard similar to the blizzard a 
short time ago on Lake Huron and she happened to be in the center of it, 
with ice conditions all around her; and, so far as she is concerned, she went out 
of sight; that is all we know. She was a new, substantial vessel, built as well 
as a vessel can be built. It is our idea that she broke; something happened to 
her, since the vessel would have weathered the storm, notwithstanding it was 
the severest ever occurring on Lake Michigan. 

Mr. Thatcher. That was about 20 years ago, in effect? 

Mr. Morton. Yes, sir. 

I do not know; I never heard of those boats. I presume the 
Chicora and Milwaukee were passenger boats, because Mr. Morton, 
of the Graham & Morton Line, never operated any freight boats that 
I know of. He has always been, to my knowledge, in the combined 
passenger and package freight business. 

Mr. Davis. Are there any records kept in the Department of Com¬ 
merce or the Life-Saving Service, or any other department or organi¬ 
zation, of the number of vessels lost and the number of lives lost on 
the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Nolan. I think there would be, Mr. Congressman. I will 
try to find out and get that information for you if I can. You 

48420—21-25 


386 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

understand I was never before this committee before, and I did not 
know what I was going to be asked. 

Mr. Davis. I thought you might have that knowledge as to whether 
such records are kept by any department. 

Mr. Nolan. They are supposed to be kept. I do not know by what 
department, but I believe they are supposed to be kept, and I will 
try to find out for you. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. O’Brien wants to ask this witness one question, 
with your permission, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Certainly. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would like to have the witness tell how many 
life-saving stations there are on the chain of Lakes and how many 
life-saving stations there are in the vicing of Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. Scott. Now? 

Mr. O’Brien. Now; yes. 

Mr. Nolan. Mr. Chairman, there are 63 life-saving stations on the 
Great Lakes. I would like to illustrate this, if possible, for the 
benefit of the committee, on this map. Here is the Great Lakes 
district- 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me suggest something right there. When 
your words go into the record and you say here is so and so, the record 
won’t show where that is at all. Try and describe the location. 

Mr. Briggs. Give the name of the place, or something like that, if 
you can, to show the location. 

Mr. Hardy. Just say on the east end of Lake Superior. 

Mr. Nolan. On the eastern end of Lake Ontario, where the Amer¬ 
ican shore line starts, some place around about here- 

Mr. H ardy. Don’t say “ here ”; name the point. 

Mr. Nolan. Oswego is on the American side. I start here from 
Osw r ego. The American shore line runs all the way around Lake 
Ontario down to a place here- 

Mr. Hardy. Never say “ here ”; name a place. 

Mr. Briggs. About halfway along the lake shore. 

Mr. Nolan. Along the southern shore of Lake Ontario, halfway 
over, at least; then all the southern shore of Lake Erie around up 
through here, up to Scotts Point; and then from Port Huron, in 
Saginaw Bay, around here and around there, around by Alpena, up 
to the Straits of Mackinaw, through the straits, down the eastern 
shore of Lake Michigan, the southern shore, and the western shore 
of Lake Michigan, the shores of Green Bay, around the northern 
shore of Lake Michigan; starting from the Soo, along the southern 
shore of Lake Superior and along the shore clean up to Duluth and 
partly up the north shore at least 20 or 30 miles, past two harbors, 
to my knowledge—I do not know how much farther than that—is 
the American shore. And in all that distance there are 63 life-saving 
stations. 

Mr. Briggs. Can you estimate about what distance that is ? 

Mr. Nolan. I can not. I just want to say, for your benefit, in this 
little spot which we have called the graveyard of the Lakes, Saginaw 
Bay, there are five. 

Mr. Hardy. Five life-saving stations? 

Mr. Nolan. Yes, sir; 63 in all that territory and 5 in Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. Chindblom. The 5 are part of the 63, are they ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 387 

Mr. Nolan. The 5 are part of the 63; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that for the purpose of giving assistance to stranded 
vessels and vessels in distress ? 

Mr. Nolan. Certainly; any vessels in distress. 

Mr. Scott. Where are the five in Saginaw Bay ? 

Mr. Nolan. I can give you the names. 

Mr. Edmonds. Are they in operation all of the year ? 

Mr. Nolan. During the navigation season they are open. I can 
not tell you during the wintertime whether they are open or not. 
There is no navigation in the wintertime except on Lake Michigan 
between Detroit and Windsor on the Detroit River. 

Mr. Edmonds. These life-saving stations are open during the sum¬ 
mer time—all during the summer ? 

Mr. Nolan. All during the season of navigation. 

Mr. Chindblom. When does the season of navigation end? 

Mr. Nolan. It ends about the 5th or the 10th of December on the 
Lakes. 

Mr. Edmonds. I would like to know what the witness is trying to 
prove. 

Mr. Nolan. The statement was made here—some witness testified 
that Saginaw Bay was not the graveyard of the Lakes, as we call it. 
I want to show you there are more life-saving stations in that district 
than any other district on the Lakes. 

Mr. (xahn. How many passenger boats navigate Saginaw Bay ? 

Mr. Nolan. There are two that I know of—there are seven Ameri¬ 
can boats that I know of; that is, they do not operate out of there, 
but they go across Saginaw Bay. There are nine boats. 

Mr. Gahn. They do not go into Saginaw Bay? 

Mr. Nolan. They cross it; they do not go into it. 

Mr. Edmonds. After you prove it is the graveyard of the Lakes, 
what are you going to do with it? 

Mr. Nolan. The only reason I am doing that is the impression was 
given here that Lake Huron and Saginaw Bay is not a dangerous 
lake. Mr. Scott, my impression is, tried to give that impression. 

Mr. Edmonds. You are trying to prove to him that it is dangerous ? 

Mr. Nolan. I am trying to prove to him that it is dangerous. 

Mr. Edmonds. Are you satisfied that it is dangerous now ? 

Mr. Hardy. It might have some bearing on this question if these 
life-saving stations are deemed necessary, as to whether the ships 
ought to be well manned. 

Mr. Scott. Can you give the names of the stations ? 

Mr. Nolan. Pointe aux Barques Light, right near Pointe aux 
Barques Light. 

Mr. Furuseth. From what are you reading? 

Mr. Nolan. I am reading from the register of the commissioned 
and warrant officers and cadets and ships and stations of the United 
States Coast Guard, January 1, 1921. Port Austin, about 2 miles 
southeast of Port Austin Reef Light. 

Mr. Briggs. Has that station a number? 

Mr. Nolan. The station is numbered 249. Another station, 
No. 250, near Tawas Light; another station, No. 251, near Sturgeon 
Point Light. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean to say Sturgeon Point is on Saginaw 
Bay, do you? 


388 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Nolan. That it is? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. I say it is; I am giving you the names. 

Mr. Scott. Do you mean to tell this committee that Sturgeon 
Point is on Saginaw Bay? 

Mr. Nolan. Where is it? I do not know. 

Mr. Scott. That is the point; I insisted you did not know. I live 
within 30 miles of Sturgeon Point. Sturgeon Point is at least 60 or 
70 miles from Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. Nolan. Mr. Congressman, Thunder Bay—Alpena is on Sagi¬ 
naw Bay, is it not ? 

Mr. Scott. Not by about 100 miles; Alpena is on Thunder Bay, 12 
miles from Thunder Bay Light, 12 miles from Thunder Bay station. 

Mr. Nolan. Any sailor who will tell you what Saginaw Bay is 
will tell you it is the body of water between Saginaw Islands Lights 
and Thunder Bay. 

Mr. Scott. He will tell me it is Lake Huron, and if he does not tell 
me it is Lake Huron I will know he is not a sailor and does not know 
what he is talking about. 

Mr. Nolan. It is called Saginaw Bay, Congressman. 

Mr. Scott. This is the first time I ever heard it called Saginaw 
Bay. 

Mr. Hardy. You gentlemen are interesting, but the map shows all 
that. It is the little pocket there that ends at Alpena and begins at 
the other point you named? 

Mr. Nolan. Saginaw Bay starts at Thunder Bay Island and ends 
at Pointe aux Barques. 

Mr. Briggs. It does not seem to me it makes any difference. 

Mr. Gahn. It does not seem to me the gentleman should say it is 
Saginaw Bay. 

Mr. Scott. Here is Saginaw Bay on the map [indicating]. If 
Saginaw Bay ran up where he says it does, they would say, “ Sagi¬ 
naw Bay.” It really is not material one way or the other, but I hate 
to have the committee given an absolutely false impression about the 
geography of Michigan. 

Mr. Nolan. Mr. Scott, to get into Thunder Bay, what would you 
call Saginaw Bay? I do not know what part of the bay you call 
Saginaw Bay. You have to come by Pointe aux Barques or else 
come in by Thunder Bay Island from either end you are going into. 

Mr. Scott. You do not hit Saginaw Bay, and no one ever thinks 
of hitting Saginaw Bay until you pass Charity Islands on the north. 

Mr. Hardy. We understand what this witness means when he 
says Saginaw Bay, and that is all that is necessary. 

Mr. Nolan. There is one other little point I wanted to bring out 
and that is this: Mr. Newman, manager of the C. & B., made a state¬ 
ment, from which I gathered the impression there are nine A. B.’s 
on his boat that have nothing to do, that they are put there by this 
law, extra men put there by this law, and have nothing else to do 
but wait for an accident or an emergency. That is not true. There 
is part of the law requiring a certain percentage of the able seamen 
on the boat. That did not increase the men on a single passenger 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 389 

boat on the Lakes, to my knowledge. That boat he claims he has 
12 A. Ik’s working at navigating that ship that he is perfectly satis¬ 
fied with, and that he has to carry nine more able seamen, those nine 
able seamen or “ extra able seamen,” as he calls them, replaced other 
men in the crew. They are not extra men put on. He did not have 
to put an extra man on, but only to put the nine able seamen in posi¬ 
tions formerly filled by smokestack watchmen or cabin patrols or 
ordinary seamen. If he put them on as ordinary seamen, it would 
mean a little difference in money to them. An ordinary seaman’s 
wages were $87.50 per month last year. The able seaman’s wages 
were $125. That is a difference of $37.50 per month on nine men, or 
about $340 a month. Figured down it amounts to $11 a day for the 
largest boat on the Lakes, a boat carrying approximately 2,200 or 
2,300 passengers. It costs her. or did cost her last year, or it would 
cost her if she put them on as able seamen, which I presume he 
did, $11 a day. 

Hr. Chindblom. But still, Mr. Witness, if it only costs $11 a day, 
what right has the Congress of the United States, by law, to compel 
anybody to pay $11 if it is useless? 

Mr. NoLx\n. That is right; it has no right to do that if it is use¬ 
less: but it is not useless. You did not let me finish my statement. 
It costs him $11 to do it, to provide greater safety for the lives of 
the people he carries while at sea. 

Mr. Hardy. Which is 2,200. 

Mr. Nolan. Twenty-two hundred or a half cent apiece. He testi¬ 
fied his fare was $6. The war tax on that fare amounted to 60 cents. 
The total cost for providing greater safety of life at sea for those 
people was half a cent apiece. I do not think it is exorbitant. 

Mr. Scott. What is a smokestack watchman? 

Mr. Nolan. The smokestack watchman on that boat is the fellow 
who patrols the deck around the smokestack—to be frank with 
you—to see that men and women who happen to be sitting up around 
there behave themselves. 

Mr. Scott. I am very glad to know; I never heard of one before. 
I am learning a lot of things that I never knew before. 

Mr. Edmonds. I suppose he takes care of the “ sparks.” [Laugh¬ 
ter.] 

Mr. Nolan. I have no further testimony. Mr. Chairman, if they 
are through questioning me. 

Mr. Gaiin. What percentage of the lives lost on the Great Lakes 
have been lost on Saginaw Bay as you describe it? 

Mr. Nolan. I have not those figures. I do not know where they 
could be obtained. 

Mr. Gahn. Have you a guess ? 

Mr. Nolan. Well, I have not; no. I have never given any thought 
to the subject. 

Mr. Gatin. Have very many people lost their lives on Saginaw 
Bay? 

Mr. Nolan. I presume they have. I know that Lake Huron and 
that whole Saginaw Bay district was hardest hit by the storm of 
1913, when there were 250 sailors’ lives lost in one storm. 

Mr. Gahn. In Saginaw Bay? 


390 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Nolan. No; the Lake Huron district—Saginaw Bay district. 

Mr. Gahn. Why is Saginaw Bay called the graveyard of the 
Lakes? Is it because boats go down there or lives are lost there? 

Mr. Nolan. Boats and lives, I suppose. I did not give that title 
to it; it had that title when I started sailing in 1905. The first trip 
I made on the boats I heard that title for Saginaw Bay, and I have 
heard it repeatedly since. 

Mr. Chindblom. It is only because you heard it that it has stuck 
in your memory ? 

Mr. Gahn. Your experience would not lead you to believe it was a 
graveyard of the Lakes, would it ? 

Mr. Nolan. I will say this: In the fall of the year we always 
figure on getting rough weather going across that stretch from 
Thunder Bay Island to Pointe Aux Barques. That is, there are 
spots on the Lakes where the wind has not such a long swipe at you 
as other spots. For instance, you will notice we are only 5 or 10 miles 
offshore on a great many courses, but across Saginaw Bay you are 
out of sight of land; you are 20, 30, or 40 miles, probably, offshore on 
that course. 

Mr. Scott. Where? 

Mr. Nolan. From Thunder Bay Island to Pointe Aux Barques. 

Mr. Scott. Where are you 40 miles offshore on the regular course ? 

Mr. Nolan. I do not know that you are 40 miles offshore; I' say 
20, 30, or 40 miles. 

Mr. Scott. Where are you 20 miles offshore on the regular-course 
ships? 

Mr. Nolan. On that course ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Nolan. You get out in the middle of it and you will find you 
are at least 20. 

Mr. Scott. All right; you show it on the map; show one place 
where you are 20 miles offshore on the regular-course ships outside in 
Saginaw Bay proper and then measure right into Bay City. 

Mr. Briggs. Not too many qualifications, Congressman. 

Mr. Scott 1 . I am not making any qualifications. 

(Mr. Nolan indicated a point on the map.) 

Mr. Gahn. The greatest distance is just exactly 20 miles offshore, 
according to the scale on this map. 

Mr. Nolan. It is 20 or more miles, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Gahn. No; 20 is the longest point. 

Mr. Nolan. That is the closest distance you mean, sir. 

Mr. Gahn. That is the longest distance you are away from shore. 

Mr. Nolan. That is the closest distance you steer to these different 
points. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not think it is very material whether it is 10, 15, 
20, or 40 miles. 

Mr. Nolan. It is at least 20. 

Mr. Hardy. Before Mr. Furuseth proceeds with his statement I 
would like to make a little statement myself in regard to this matter 
and put it in the record. There have been so many statements about 
this bill being a union bill that I want to state that the Members of 
Congress who were responsible for this bill were, in the first place, 
practically the whole of this Committee on the Merchant Marine and 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 391 

Fisheries of the House; second, the conference committees of the two 
bodies, the Senate and the House. 

This bill as finally enacted into law was the unanimous report of 
the Senate and House conferees, composed on the part of the House 
by Joshua Alexander, myself, M. E. Burke—who, I believe, was a 
Michigan man—William S. Greene, and C. F. Curry. Mr. Curry 
is a California man. On the part of the Senate they were Duncan 
U. Fletcher; George E. Chamberlain; James K. Vardaman; Knute 
Nelson, of Minnesota; and William Alden Smith, of Michigan. The 
bill was passed after years of investigation and that report was 
made, and I think 1 can say that every interest concerned, and espe¬ 
cially the Lakes, were given a full and fair hearing as far as we could 
in the preparation of this bill. 

I make that statement because this bill has been attacked. The 
man whose statement was put in, Mr. Manahan, was on the commit¬ 
tee for one year. He was a Republican from Minnesota, elected from 
the State at large. He was an extremest in his views; there is no 
question about that. But every man who knows those other men 
knows, I think, that this committee did not report a bill without 
giving a full investigation and giving hearings to the Lake people. 
And the whole report of the committees shows that they were fully 
heard. I want to make that statement, because I want to say it was 
the struggle of years for the preparation of this bill. While it was 
being prepared one of our members, Judge Alexander, attended the 
International Ship Conference at London. A great many of the 
regulations as to the safety of life at sea—as to the vessels, the life¬ 
boats and life rafts, and things of that kind—came from the knowl¬ 
edge that he acquired. He became, really, I think, the most expert 
member of this committee, and perhaps of both Houses of Congress, 
before he was appointed Secretary of Commerce.. 

The bill was originally presented, my recollection is, in the House 
by W. B. Wilson. 

Mr. Scott. Recently Secretary of Labor? 

Mr. Hardy. Later Secretary of Labor. It was taken over then 
and framed by Judge Alexander, myself, and Mr. Wilson. It 
passed the House and went to the Senate. The Senate adopted their 
bill and sent it over to us. We took the Senate bill and substituted 
for it, practically, the House bill. It went back to the Senate and 
the conferees agreed upon it. Ninety-five per cent of the bill as 
adopted was not affected by any action of Mr. La Follette. 

It was the bill prepared by these gentlemen in the House and Sen¬ 
ate whose names I have given you. But it has been stigmatized as 
the La Follette bill ever since by the critics of it. How much Mr. 
La Follette had to do with it I ‘do not know. He defended it and 
helped to put it through the Senate; that is true. But this bill as it 
is written into the laws is the bill prepared by the House Committee 
on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries and the Senate Committee on 
Commerce, I presume, of which Mr. Nelson was the leading Repub¬ 
lican member and Mr. Fletcher was the leading Democratic member. 

I want that to go in as a part of the record, so that it can be shown 
this was never any joke to anybody—I do not care what the Lake 
men may have stigmatized it. I hey have been fighting it ever since, 
and this has now developed to be a frontal attack, it seems to me, 


392 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

upon the whole seaman’s bill, and therefore I think we ought to be 
awake to the whole situation. One gentleman suggested to me that it 
might be the ocean interests want a hearing. I do not know whether 
they do or not, but I make this statement because, in justice to Mr. 
Greene, myself, Judge Alexander, and everybody else, I know we 
tried to give a fair hearing. 

Mr. Scott. May I be entitled to have just a moment, in view of the 
statement made by Judge Hardy? 

My expression, which evidently provoked the statement made by 
the gentleman from Texas, was based somewhat on hearsay, and it 
was in no sense in the spirit of criticism of the action of the gentle¬ 
men whom he has named. The necessity for some affirmative legis¬ 
lation was apparent, and that great thought, deliberation, and care 
were given to the preparation of the bill has never been questioned 
by me, and I do not now question it. I have always understood, and 
I so stated very frankly to this committee—not in the spirit of criti¬ 
cism of the bill but in view of its inapplication in many instances to 
the Great Lakes—the Great Lakes operators did not seriously con¬ 
sider the application of the bill at the time it was heard. 

That has been my information. If it is inaccurate, all w T ell and 
good; but I do not want the gentlemen to draw the inference that 
there was any ridicule on my part or the part of anyone else directed 
at this legislation. Its operation has proven ludicrous, I am frank to 
admit, in so far as some of the provisions are concerned applying to 
small ships. Unfortunately, all those small things could not be fore¬ 
seen, and it is not in any degree a criticism of the committee having 
charge of the bill at the time that they could not be foreseen. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to add one thing more. This bill was seriously 
considered by every Lake interest at the time it was being investi¬ 
gated and passed. Men were here and they were given every oppor¬ 
tunity to raise that objection, and these various sections to make it 
applicable to the Lakes were gone into then. But that there may be 
some error here and there nobody will question. 

Mr. Scott. That is my sole point. 

Mr. Hardy. I will say that when you made that remark perhaps I 
misunderstood it. 

Mr. Scott. You certainly did. 

Mr. Gahn. May I inquire of both the gentlemen whether, as Mr. 
Newman suggested, or some one, that it was said to the Great Lakes 
representatives that if the bill hurt them too much they should come 
back and they would be given consideration ? 

Mr. Scott. I was not here at that time, and I do not know whether 
that statement was made. 

Mr. Bankhead. Let us get down to some testimony. 

Mr. Scott. May I be indulged in, because the statement has been 
made that I have made a frontal attack on this bill, and I do not 
want that to go unchallenged, because I have not made a frontal 
attack on the bill. I have been very modest in my requests for modi¬ 
fications of this law, and I have only asked that it be modified in so 
far as it will allow my people to enjoy the natural facilities that are 
given to them. 

Before the next witness proceeds I wish to say this to the commit¬ 
tee : That if my bill does not specifically now relate to the Great Lakes 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 393 

navigation, I shall ask this committee to so amend it that it will only 
apply to the Great Lakes, because that was its sole purpose, as I 
stated here at the inception, and I intend to adhere to it. 

Mr. Gahn. May we have Mr. Hardy’s answer to my inquiry? I 

want to see whether the Lakes are estopped- 

Mr. Hardy. Certainly no interest is estopped on coming to this 
committee for a correction of the legislation if the legislation was in 
error. Whether I said it or not, I say it now. 

The Chairman. Now, gentlemen, please let Mr. Furuseth proceed 
with his statement without interruption, making such notes as you 
desire and then question him afterwards. We desire to get through, 
if possible, to-day. 

STATEMENT OF MR. ANDREW FURUSETH, PRESIDENT OF THE 
INTERNATIONAL SEAMEN’S UNION OF AMERICA. 

Mr. Furuseth. Before saying anything, Mr. Chairman, about this 
bill, I beg permission to clear up one thing with reference to my¬ 
self. The other day you asked me a question, based upon the report 
of the newspapers from Boston. I want to give a clear, short state¬ 
ment for the record and for the purpose of possibly clearing the 
mind of this committee as to what kind of an animal I am. 

One of the distinguished lawyers involved in the Duplex case and 
I had a debate on the open shop in New York, with some 3,000 
people present. I prepared with great care what I had to say in the 
half hour, in response to that lawyer. Here is the statement, abso¬ 
lutely word for word. At that time I read it. Somebody was pres¬ 
ent there, and they asked me to come and speak to the students at 
Harvard College/ They had a convention of students there. At 
great inconvenience and at some expense I went there from Wash¬ 
ington, and I repeated substantially word for word what I had said 
in New York. Somebody heard me talk there, and there was a strike 
on in Boston of some thousands of people, and they asked me to 
address an open meeting on the question of the open shop. I went 
there for that purpose and spoke in the hall in question. Here is 
the statement I made, which has been published broadcast all over 
the country by somebody else, not by me. I went there and spoke 
substantially from memory. I have repeated it so often that I did 
not have the manuscript before me, but substantially I repeated 
just exactly what I had said before in the two other places. 

In this statement there is a reference to the use of injunction m 
labor disputes, how they are obtained, and how they have been used 
through the ages, and'how they are used now in some instances. 
Somebody in the audience asked me, “ What would you do if such 
an injunction was issued against you?” after I described a certain 
kind to be found here. I said, “I would disobey that kind of an 
injunction. I do not believe that a court that would issue that kind 
of an injunction would be entitled to any more respect than the king 
who issues a decree regardless of the interests and the freedom of 
the subjects or the citizens of the country in question.” 

Now,' those are the facts exactly, gentlemen. I will conclude this 
by simply saying that I have been stigmatized m the labor move¬ 
ment, if you like, as the most absolute antisocialist and antianarchist 
to be found in it in America. As to being a bolshevist, I have over 



394 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

and over again said that bolshevism is insanity and can not last be¬ 
cause it denies human freedom and runs into teeth of the whole 
entire history of the Nordic race, or what we call the white race, 
sometimes called the white race, and sometimes the Nordic. These 
are the facts. Whatever they may be for me or against me, I will 
have to take the consequences, but I beg of you gentlemen, if you 
have anything against me, do not visit it upon the merchant marine 
of this country or upon the poor devils who are now working in it. 

Now, then, I had a note here to explain the seamen’s bill and how 
it came about to be drafted and Avhat stages it went through before 
it was finally passed, but Congressman Hardy has done it. 

Mr. Hardy. I wish you would do that, because I want it in the 
record, and I did not give it very fully. 

Mr. Furuseth. There are seamen on the Pacific and sailors on the 
Pacific, and when I speak of seamen I mean everybody on board a 
ship, and when I speak of sailors I mean men in the deck department 
of the ship, the men who handle the ship and handle the boats, and 
when I speak of firemen I mean the men who work in the firerooms 
and the engine room of the ship, exclusive of licensed officers. 

In 1885 we organized on the Pacific. I was away at the time, at 
sea. I joined the union as soon as I came into port. Two years later 
I was made its secretary. I have found that in 1872 the shipping 
commissioners’ act was passed. The shipping commissioners’ act 
denied to the seamen the benefit of the thirteenth amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States and relegated him to the position 
occupied exactly by the Negroes in the South prior to the emancipa¬ 
tion proclamation. But this shipping commissioners’ act provided 
that every seaman signed in an American vessel going from any State, 
except to an adjoining State, must sign shipping articles before a 
shipping commissioner. 

In 1874 the Congress passed a law, as near as I can remember the 
words, providing that none of the provisions of this act, the shipping 
commissioners’ act, shall apply to the coastwise trade, so that that 
cut the Lakes completely out of it; it cut the coastwise trade and the 
protected trade out of it, the one that foreigners can not operate 
vessels in, but it took the seamen completely out of the shipping com¬ 
missioners’ offices in those trades. It provided, however, that they 
should sign articles, no matter in what trade they were—that is the 
old maritime law—and that if they did not sign articles at all before 
they got on board the ship they could leave the ship at any time and 
would be entitled to the highest wages paid in that particular trade. 

Now, we found out that the imprisonment law, which gave the 
right to put a man three months in fail for quitting a vessel—and I 
am frank to say that I was the man who found it; I hunted the law— 
we found that in the coastwise trade we could not be put three months 
in prison for violating our contract to labor, and we made use of 
that to assist us in organizing and getting some better conditions for 
ourselves. We worked then anywhere from 10 to 18 hours a day. 
There were no regulations as to hours, no regulations as to wages, 
except such as we ourselves could enforce, which was all based upon 
the old traditions of the sea. 

In 1890 the shipowners on the Pacific coast came to Congress and 
asked that they be permitted to imprison the men who quit their 
vessels in violation of their contracts. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 395 

Congress gave them that right in a qualified way, so that it read 

whenever the ship, in the shipping commissioners’ view ”—the old 
commissioners’ law shall apply. That is to say, whenever the ship¬ 
owner establishes to the satisfaction of the commissioners that they 
have violated their contract, then they shall be subject to 3 months 
imprisonment or 12 months’ imprisonment, which was then the 
penalty. The shipowners immediately sent us all through the ship¬ 
ping commissioners’ office so as to apply the law. As the result there 
was a struggle, a bitter struggle, lasting eight months. Thirteen 
men a day died during it. I know of men getting out of the vessels 
and hiding in the redwoods of Mendocino County, and they were 
pursued by bloodhounds, to be taken back. I have seen with my 
own eyes men shackled together, the left hand to the right, a whole 
string, going up the streets of San Francisco time and time again, 
to go up to court to be sent off to sea against their will. 

I came here in 1894, sent by the men to try to get rid of some ot 
those terrible things. We had at that time on the Pacific coast 
perhaps the best sailors that the world has ever seen. There was 
hardly a man that was not able to be a boatswain on any vessel 
afloat. Thousands of them left. There were some 4,000 men afloat, 
and actually 3,000 men left. I saw them tearing up their citizen¬ 
ship papers, like that [indicating], strip after strip, and throw them 
away, like that. They permitted one man to be sent here, and they 
selected me to come. 

This struggle, gentlemen, has gone on from that time until this. 
It began in the month of March, 1895. 

Now, in 1893 a committee of sailors was elected by our organiza¬ 
tion, and they served for two weeks, going over the law, section by 
section, and suggesting amendments to the law where it was most 
harsh and unreasonable. That was sent to Senator Frye. He sent 
it to the Commissioner of Navigation. 

Mr. Bankhead. Senator Frye, of Maine ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Senator Frye, of Maine. He sent it to the Com¬ 
missioner of Navigation, which is the graveyard for any legisla¬ 
tion that the seamen have ever sought or for the execution of any 
law that has ever been passed in the interest of the seamen, and it 
slept there. 

In 1894 a bill was introduced, the same identical thing was in¬ 
troduced by Congressman Maguire, of California. Hearings lasted 
for about a month in the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fish¬ 
eries, which did not have anything to do with the Lakes at the time, 
because there was no imprisonment on the Lakes, and the bill as 
drawn had nothing to do with it. 

Then, finally, in 1895, in the month of January, Mr. Dingley, a 
man, took hold of the matter and amended, together with Senator 
Frye, the law which was later known as the Maguire Act. It took 
the coastwise seamen, and the lake seamen out of the lake imprison¬ 
ment proposition again. 

In 1898 a bill was passed dealing with the coastwise trade, abolish¬ 
ing some of the other hardships, and fixing up a scale of provisions. 
We eat, sleep, and work on the law, by law, and through law when¬ 
ever we can get the benefit of it; that is, whenever it is in our favor, 
which is not very often, we get it. A bill was passed dealing with the 


396 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

coastwise trade and abolishing the imprisonment in any American 
harbor, improving the scale of provisions, as I said, and doing sev¬ 
eral other things, which it would take up too much of your time to 
go into, and we lived under that until 1915, on the 4th of March, 
when this bill which applied to the coastwise trade was made to 
apply to the merchant marine of the United States entirely. 

But pending that, during all these years, there were constantly 
hearing in one Congress, another Congress, a third Congress, a fourth 
Congress, a fifth Congress, a sixth Congress, and a seventh Congress 
[indicating printed hearings], and in the meantime we took the ques¬ 
tion of the application of the thirteenth amendment to seamen before 
the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is made 
up of able men, as you gentlemen know. In the case of Robertson v. 
Baldwin seven of the justices held that the thirteenth amendment 
had no application to seamen and held the law under which we were 
imprisoned valid. One justice wrote a separate dissenting opinion. 
We published the dissenting opinion and distributed it among the 
Members of Congress and Senators, or anybody that wanted to get 
it and was willing to take it and read it, and that resulted in the 
passage of the law in 1898. 

The thing that really finally brought about the passage of the law 
in 1915 was the great disaster to the Titanic. Shortly after that- 

Mr. Briggs. After what? 

Mr. Furuseth. After the Titanic disaster an international confer¬ 
ence was held in London for the purpose of fixing up life-saving ap¬ 
pliances for ships and crews so as to avoid these terrible disasters in 
the future. America sent 11 delegates there, and how it happened 
I do not know, but I was sent as one of them. I had not been there 
for five days before I knew from the delegations of three European 
countries that they were going to use that to prevent the seamen’s act 
being passed in the United States and prevent the United States 
from getting upon the ocean and becoming a competitor upon the 
ocean. I was on the committee on life-saving appliances. I worked 
until that committee was finished. Mr. Alexander was there, but he 
was not on that committee. Mr. Alexander took the decision of that 
Congress and put it in section 14 of the seamen’s act, and then quali¬ 
fied it so as to meet the most serious objections that the lake people 
had with reference to the Lakes. It was milked until it was almost 
dry. The hearings in the House committee lasted for two months; 
that is, the three hearings altogether lasted fully two months. The 
hearings in the Senate committee ran for a month and a half steady, 
and they were there all the time, and here in this book are their 
propositions. They have not said a thing here that was not said 
before, not a word. They have not made a proposition now that was 
not made before, not a single one. If I had the time I could go 
through that and show it, because there was not anybody coming here 
talking about any sand boats. The only boat of any kind on the 
Lakes or at sea that was not mentioned was the sand boat. 

So much for how this bill finally became a law. All the rest has been 
stated by Mr. Hardy. When it finally passed the House it was unani¬ 
mous ; when it finally passed the Senate, upon reconsideration, it had 
a very big majority. When it first passed it was unanimous, and then 
Senator Smith of Georgia came up, because he was down eating, get- 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 397 

ting some food, and he raised some objections and made a motion to 
reconsider, and the motion to reconsider was granted, and they argued 
it then for an hour and a half afterwards and then voted, and a two- 
thirds majority of the Senators was in favor of it. 

Then comes another phase of this thing. It passed in 1913, in the 
last hours of that Congress. President Taft mercifully vetoed it, be¬ 
cause it contained a clause actually in opposition to international law. 
It undertook to inform vessels how many men they should have to 
steer and look out and how they should be organized out on the ocean, 
when the United States, of course, has no jurisdiction. This was 
called to Mr. 1 aft’s attention, and he let the bill die with a pocket veto. 
1 was glad, and I will tell you why, gentlemen, and some of you ship¬ 
owners know it, too, that the bill that was pocket vetoed would put 
you out of business, because it provided three watches for the wheel¬ 
men, watchmen, and firemen, oiler, and water tenders—three watches. 

In other words, you would have three wheelmen, you would have to 
have three watchmen, you would have to have six or nine firemen, 
oilers, and water tenders. I called attention to that when the confer¬ 
ence was held between Mr. Alexander and a couple of men in the 
Senate—and I do not know who were with Mr. Alexander from the 
House—and finally the Senators said, “ What do you want to do with 
it ? ” I said, “ We can not do anything with it. I know that these men 
with the small vessels are going to come here on their knees begging 
for relief, but I can not do anything with it now.” 

The bill was put through with the idea that it would be changed, 
and, as I told you, on account of international relationships, the Presi¬ 
dent pocket vetoed it. 

Now, when it was introduced in the next Congress the same thing 
happened all over again, with hearings again in the House committee 
and in the Senate committee, and finally the bill came out as it is. 

So much for this bill on those lines. No; there is a little more that 
I think I ought to add. One of the things that were said about this 
bill was that it would permit an American to see that the conditions 
were such as to make it impossible to get an American to sea ; the con¬ 
ditions and the life and the law were such that no intelligent American 
would go to sea and remain at sea when he found out the conditions, 
unless, perchance, he had a chance to be an officer very quickly, and 
that was found to be so. And what was more, the shipowners said 
that, as far as getting Americans was concerned, that it was prepos¬ 
terous, and said, “ We can never get them. The Americans will not 
go to sea, no matter how you fix the law,” and they said they did not 
need any training for the men. Well, we pointed to the law in foreign 
countries. They said, “ Well, the American is so intelligent that he 
does not need any training.” 

Then we got some Congressmen to ask the men who gave the testi¬ 
mony, who it was that takes the soundings with a hand lead on board 
American ships, and they said the officers, something that happens 
in no other place in the world. Taking soundings with a hand lead 
is like this: You stand in what is called the chins, that is inside of 
the vessel, and you have got a hand lead weighing from 28 to 30 
pounds. You have got a coil and line in one hand, and you have a 
half turn around your trunk, and you stand like this and let go. 


398 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

It flies on forward all the way as far as you can throw it. Then 
you wait, and she comes up, and you get exactly the depth of the 
water, and you call it out, “ By the quarter four,” or “ By the mark 
five,” or whatever you are telling the depth of the water is. They 
said they did not have a single sailor that could do that; that an 
officer had to do it. Well, I do not know that they said that they 
did not have anybody who could do it, because they said that they 
had some sailors who were educated seamen in Europe, and they 
could do it. 

Now, less than 7 per cent sailing before the mast as sailors or fire¬ 
men are manning the ships on the Lakes, coast, and ocean. That was 
unanimously agreed to by everybody. 

Mr. Free. You mean 7 per cent Americans? 

Mr. Furuseth. Seven per cent native Americans, at the most. It 
was generally understood that it was less. We said, “ If you will 
change this law so that the American may go to sea and keep his self- 
respect, he will go to sea, because he is of the same blood as the Eng¬ 
lishman, the Scandinavian, or the north German. He is of pure 
Nordic stock, and they have always gone to sea as long as they had 
a chance, either as seamen, discoverers, or pirates, or in some other 
way.” 

Now, when a man comes to join our organization we say, “What 
nationality are you? Where was you born?” We say to him “ Now,, 
we do not want that for our sake; we want it for your sake. Have you 
got any relatives that you want us to notify in case you are lost, so 
that they can get whatever might be left after you in the shape of 
wages on the ship that you are serving on.” They say, “ Yes; I was 
born in England,” “ I was born in, Germany,” “ I was born in Switzer¬ 
land,” “ I was born in Spain,” “ I was born in Norway,” “ I was born 
in Sweden,” “ I was born in the United States,” and so on, or “ I was 
born in South America.” We have them from every country outside 
of China and Malay Peninsula, India, or Japan. Those we do not 
take into the union, because they can not become citizens of the United 
States—that is, we do not take them in yet. 

Now, we went over these cards one by one to find out the nationality 
of the men that were then in the union. We found that on July 15, 
1917, out of 42,407 men, representing all the different countries, the 
United States then had 12,219 native boms at sea. We went through 
the same performance on September 1, 1919, and we made the same 
computation and found that out of 80,067, 39,347 were native-born 
Americans. On the 1st of December, 1920, out of 156,002 men, 79,565 
were native-born Americans. So far as we can reach it, there is about 
10 per cent of the total who are citizens of the United States. 

Mr. Hardy. You mean naturalized citizens? 

Mr. Furuseth. Naturalized citizens. So that out of that number, 
out of the men employed at that time, coming and going, about 61 
per cent were citizens of the United States. I would like to submit 
this table, which shows all the different countries, where they came 
from, etc., so far as it is possible to get it shown. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 399 


(The table referred to is as follows:) 

Nationality of members of International Seamen’s Union of America, Dec. Jo, 
1920, as compared with Sept. 1, 1910, and July 15, 191 7. 

(Table compiledby U. S. Shipping Board on basis of information furnished by the International Seamen’s 

Union.) 

DECEMBER 1, 1920. 

[The Pacific: About 90 per cent organized; sailors practically all A. B.’s. The Great Lakes: About 50 
per cent organized; sailors are in the majority A. B.’s, a minority ordinary seamen. The Atlantic: 
Practically 90 per cent organized.] 


Nationality. 

All districts. 

Atlantic and Gulf 
coasts. 

Great Lakes. 

Pacific coast. 

Number. 

H 

6 

o 

o 

Ph 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

Cooks. 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

c/5 

O 

O 

O 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

Cooks. 

Argentina. 

323 


5 

298 


2 


2 

7 

7 

2 

Austria. 

917 


114 

320 

187 

91 

60 

34 

45 

26 

40 

Belgium. 

1,197 


376 

405 

336 

8 

13 

1 

19 

29 

10 

Britain 1 2 . 

19,083 


3,520 

4,650 

5,934 

1,141 

839 

473 

1,415 

494 

617 

Bulgaria. 

16 


6 



5 

3 


2 


Chile. 

837 


6 

692 





50 

49 

40 

Cuba. 

275 



218 

56 



1 




Denmark. 

4,937 


2, 246 

1,296 

461 

139 

29 

17 

580 

74 

95 

Finland. 

3', 574 


\, 874 

' 538 


151 

64 

12 

925 


10 

France. 

476 



113 

250 

11 

7 

15 

45 

10 

25 

Germany. 

2, 767 


542 

478 

421 

179 

130 

59 

605 

103 

250 

Greece..'. 

3, 045 


76 

2 182 

345 

21 

75 

12 

140 

182 

12 

Holland. 

2, 776 


1,154 

'541 

757 

45 

21 

4 

164 

38 

52 

Italy. 

1 818 


'463 

645 

411 

159 

18 

24 

50 

18 

30 

Mexico. 

935 



468 

139 




180 

78 

70 

Norway. 

8, 810 


2, 427 

2 865 

591 

696 

152 

53 

1 j fi75 

182 

169 

Philippine Islands. 

'716 


'699 




14 

3 


Poland. . 

107 






"'ll 

29 

7 



Portugal. . 

2,372 


536 

1,269 

476 




17 

12 

62 

Rumania. 

57 



47 



4 

4 


2 


Russia. 

3,683 


1,643 

532 

47i 

292 

105 

34 

435 

161 

10 

South and Central America. 










(Not specified).... 

1,103 


195 

100 

756 





52 


Spain. 

7 251 


342 

4, 890 

1,585 

15 

31 

2 

32 

275 

79 

Sweden. 

s’ 300 


2, 464 

3, 249 

336 

431 

201 

38 

1, 348 

181 

60 

Switzerland... 

'292 


' 68 

132 

9 

17 

13 

15 

8 

30 

Turkev. 

295 



197 

38 

2 

3 

1 

13 

38 

3 

United States. 

79, 565 


20, 963 

23,695 

14, 801 

4,914 

3,191 

3,718 

2, 335 

4,146 

1,802 

Others 3 . 

'475 


2 

'416 

22 

8 

27 















Total. 

156, 002 


38,954 

50, 871 

28,483 

8,328 

5, 044 

4, 576 

10,108 

6,170 

3,468 


1 United States, 51 per cent. All other countries, 49 per cent. 

2 Includes: All British possessions. 

3 Includes: Servia, Hawaiian Islands, Lithuania, Hungary, Bohemia, Syria, Jugo-Slavia, Porto Rico, 
Asia, Iceland. 

Note.— Total active membership is about 104,000. An active member is one paid up within six months. . 
The total as given arises from the great turnover, especially on the Lakes and among the firemen on the 
Atlantic. (By Andrew Furuseth.) 






















































































































400 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Nationality of members of International Seamen's Union of America, Dee. 15, 
1920, as coin pared with Sejit. 1, 1919, and July 15, 1917 —Continued. 


SEPTEMBER 1, 1919. 


Country of birth. 

All districts. 

Atlantic and Gulf 
coasts. 

Great Lakes. 

Pacific coast. 

Number. 

Per cent. 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

Cooks and 

stewards. 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

Cooks and 

stewards. 

Sailors. 

Firemen. 

Cooks and 

stewards. 

All countries. 

89,167 

100.0 

19,068 

25,286 

11,594 

7,104 

6,938 

3,702 

8,781 

3,570 

3,124 

United States. 

39,347 

44.1 

8,463 

10,123 

4,857 

3,888 

4,079 

2,910 

1,609 

2,192 

1,226 

Scandinavia. 

16,078 

18.0 

5,614 

3,489 

559 

1,315 

706 

111 

3,625 

367 

292 

British Empire. 

10,990 

12.3 

1,070 

2,503 

2,674 

934 

1,052 

448 

1,266 

328 

715 

Meliterranean countries.... 

9,700 

10.9 

1,223 

5, 962 

1,337 

164 

310 

47 

160 

303 

194 

Eastern and southeastern 












Europe. 

5,072 

5.7 

1,610 

888 

135 

443 

424 

86 

1,330 

125 

31 

Central and southwestern 


• 










Europe. 

4,937 

5. 5 

969 

915 

1,040 

357 

367 

95 

669 

151 

374 

Latin America (including 












Dutch West Indies). 

2,465 

2.9 

119 

907 

992 

3 


3 

122 

101 

218 

Philippines and Hawaii 

576 

.6 


499 






3 

74 

All others. 

2 







I 2 










! 

1 





JULY 15, 1917. 


All countries. 

42,407 

100.0 7,956 

6,567 

5,629 

4,239 

4,416 

1,073 

6,669 

3,011 

2,847 

United States. 

12,219 

28.8 1,327 

1,250 

1, 910 

1, 910 

2,234 

799 

529 

1,350 

910 

Scandinavia. 

10,854 

25.6 3,413 

1,739 

230 

1,006 

457 

70 

3,102 

550 

287 

British Empire. 

6,866 

16.2 , 530 

709 

2,152 

614 

926 

135 

651 

352 

797 

Mediterranean countries.... 

3,061 

7.3 ! 374 

1, 441 

465 

56 

134 

6 

83 

311 

191 

Eastern and southeastern 











Europe. 

3, 423 

! 8.1 1,144 

378 

47 

260 

206 

16 

1,225 

108 

39 

Central and northwestern 











Europe. 

5,582 

13.2 i 1,163 

1,002 

748 

361 

454 

46 

1,038 

321 

459 

Latin America (including 











Dutch West Indies). 

258 

.6 5 

48 

54 


1 


41 

19 

90 

All others. 

144 

.3 ... 


23 

42 

4 

1 



74 



i 










When the seamen’s act was passed, when it was under consideration, 
I mean, every country in Europe, so far as I know, but certainly 
Holland, Spain, France, England, Germany and Norway, and those 
are the maritime countries of Europe, made representations, through 
their diplomatic representatives, to the United States Government 
against the adoption of the legislation. Their protests were for¬ 
warded by the State Department to the Committee on Commerce of 
the Senate, and the Committee on Commerce of the Senate had those 
protests before them, and when the bill was finally passed the diplo¬ 
matic gallery was full of the representatives of foreign nations. 

Then the a tack was on the President. He held the bill in his hands 
for two or three days. He signed it, but nobody knew whether it had 
, been signed or not until about 9 o’clock in the morning, when he came 
to the Capitol and said to Senator La Follette, “ I have signed the 
bill, but I would like to make an announcement myself.” 

Mr. Hardy. That foreign opposition was on account of the abolish¬ 
ment of imprisonment for desertion, and also on account of certain 
provisions of that bill applicable to foreign vessels in our ports ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Exactly. You see, I have not gone into the pur¬ 
pose. of the law yet, the real purpose of this law, the thing that car¬ 
ried it through Congress and the Senate, but I shall try now to do 
that. 

































































AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 401 

This law, has, first of all, for a purpose, to create a condition under 
which it will be possible for the American Nation to share in the sea 
power of the world, to build up a merchant marine and train the per¬ 
sonnel for that merchant marine that can be transferred to the Navy 
whenever it is needed. That is the prime purpose of the bill. Now, in 
order to do that, in order to be on the ocean at all, you must compete, 
because ocean commerce is highly competitive. They had the best 
of us as to wages in the foreign way. The wages of seamen depend 
upon the port at which the men are signed. The wages of the port 
depend again upon the hinterland or the country tributary to that 
seaport. So that we find Australia has wages about equal to the 
Pacific, and New York has wages from 20 to 30 per cent lower than 
the Pacific used to have them. 

Mr. Chindblom. When was that? 

Mr. Furuseth. That ran steadily from 1805 to 1916. 

Mr. Bankhead. You mean 1905, or 1805? 

Mr. Furuseth. 1805; and there was no change in the wages either 
in those years. A seaman had $18 a month in 1805, and he had $18 a 
month, going off into deep water from New York, in 1913 and 1914. 
Why had everybody else’s wages been doubled, trebbled, quad¬ 
rupled and quintupled, and the seamen’s wages stood still ? 

The secret of that is that everybody else had become free to leave 
one employer and go to another. He might go to a worse one, but it 
had the tendency to lift, and by and by the men got better wages 
still through organization. The seamen were held in the shackles 
of their own status and could not do anything to assist themselves 
at all, and so consequently the American quit the sea completely. 
The Norwegian was quitting the sea, and he has quit it now. The 
Englishman had quit the sea to such an extent in 1915 that more than 
100,000 Asiatics were serving in the merchant marine of Great 
Britain. If they had not gotten into the war with Germany and had 
gone on in that way for another 10 or 20 years, anyone could have 
kicked his foot through the English merchant marine and the English 
sea power, because it depends upon men. The United States mer¬ 
chant marine could not pay the wages that would keep the American 
at sea, even if he got to be a free man, even if you swept away all 
the terrible things. 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Chairman, I do not want to interrupt Mr. Furu¬ 
seth, but it does seem to me that if we are going to take up the entire 
seamen’s bill, with all these foreign ramifications affecting our sea¬ 
going vessels, we will wander very far afield from the problem affect¬ 
ing the Great Lakes and open up the whole controversy. 

The Chairman. Yes; the bill we have under consideration you are 
going into pretty well. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know how much time I have taken up. 

The Chairman. But we are only considering the law as it affects 
the vessels on the Lakes. 

Mr. Furuseth. As far as the bill itself is concerned, it goes much 
farther than the Lakes; it covers the coast. 

Mr. Mills. If that is so, we have not begun these hearings. 

Mr. Furuseth. It covers the coast. 

Mr. Scott. Did you hear my opening statement, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. I heard it; yes. 

48420—21-26 


402 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, Al^D 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Scott. I intend to ask the committee if it does not- 

Mr. Furuseth. That is very well. I have had many a drink of 
water when I was thirsty put to my lips, and somebody gives it that 
[indicating]. 

Mr. Scott. Well, I do not want you to take my word for it- 

The Chairman. If we are going to consider this bill, let us con¬ 
sider it. 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, I will get to the Lake question, because it 
connects up in a peculiar way. However, let me give you just one 
thing- 

Mr. Bankhead. If this bill contains an amendment to the law 
affecting salt-water shipping, Mr. Scott has said that that was not 
his purpose in introducing his bill, and I think it would be very 
valuable to the committee and to Mr. Scott, in carrying out his sug¬ 
gestion, if you would give very briefly what features of the general 
law are affected by this bill. 

Mr. Hardy. Not only that, but the proponents of the bill discussed 
the present law’s effect on union labor, strikes, and everything of 
that sort, and I thought the discussion took a pretty wide scope. 

Mr. Free. Being a new member of the committee, if it does not 
take too much time, I would like to get the recital he is giving, 
because it is an education to me. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not think it would take him long to get through 
with the line he is talking about and then get down to its application 
to the lake vessels. 

Mr. Mills. It will take an everlastingly long time if we examine 
him at all on some of the statements made here—on these tables and 
on the whole question affecting foreign Governments—because if we 
are going into that question I should hesitate to leave some of the 
statements unexplained in this record. 

Mr. Hardy. The other side has presented a whole lot of this thing. 

Mr. Briggs. Before you go on with the documents you have got 
there, I think the committee would like to understand just the scope 
of this bill. 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, I will get it very shortly. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what we are considering—the bill itself. 

Mr. Furuseth. Section 2 of the bill amends section 2 of the sea¬ 
men’s act, so called. That is the official name of it. Incidentally, 
I would like to put a word in the record there. I could not say it the 
other day because I was not permitted to do so, yet Mr. Scott said 
something there about Senator La Follette, which is in the record: 
and I want to say that if I had been in any other place I would 
have protested at once. I, at least, never speak ill of those who are 
not present to defend themselves. 

Section 2 of the bill establishes in every vessel under the American 
flag a two-watch system for sailors, oilers, and water tenders. No 
matter where the vessel runs, no matter whether she may be running 
to the Cape of Good Hope, Calcutta, Australia, China, the Black Sea, 
or anywhere else in the world, from the United States, there is noth¬ 
ing but two watches for oilers, water tenders, and sailors. If she 
runs 16 hours or less, then it is two watches for everybody, firemen 
included. If she runs 16 hours or more, then the firemen are per¬ 
mitted to keep three watches. They are the only ones who are per- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 403 


mittecl to keep the three watches. If she runs 16 hours or less, nobody 
is permitted to keep three watches. Everybody is put back upon a 
12-hour day and an 84-hour week—everybody. And that is done 
while in Europe they are now making arrangements to put the fire¬ 
men on a 48-hour week and the sailors on a 56-hour week. Here is a 
record of that. 

Mr. Bankhead. What record is that you are referring to ? 

Mr. Furuseth. This is the record of the meeting of the different 
nations of the League of Nations at Genoa on the 15th of June of 
last year. They were instructed to hold that meeting by a previous 
meeting in 1919, here in Washington, where we had agreed that 48 
hours’ work should be made applicable to seamen as well as any other 
people. They realized that they could not make it applicable simply 
by resolution, and so they arranged for a special meeting at Genoa, 
one man representing the shipowners, one man representing the per¬ 
sonnel on board ships, and two men representing the Government, 
as such, four from each nation, having permission to carry with them 
three advisors each. 

Mr. Bankhead. What nations were represented in that confer¬ 
ence? 

Mr. Furtjseth. Every maritime or nonmaritime nation in the 
world, practically. 

Mr. Bankhead. Were we represented? 

Mr. Furtjseth. No; outside of the United States. 

Mr. Bankhead. Is that document available to the members of the 
committee? Who publishes it? 

Mr. Furuseth. The conference itself. 

Mr. Bankhead. Is that in the Public Library ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No ; I got it sent to me. I do not know but what it 
might be got here, but I got it sent to me from the secretary of the 
labor office, because I was present there trying to guard and take 
care of the interests of the United States. 

Now, in the arrangements they have draft conventions, and when 
they have draft conventions it is obligatory upon the different na¬ 
tions signing it to abide by it, and it takes a two-thirds vote of 
these representatives, 4 from each nation, 2 representing the Gov¬ 
ernment as such, 1 representing the shipowners, and 1 the personnel; 
that is, when two-thirds agree to vote on it, then it becomes a draft 
convention and it becomes the duty of the different nations to sign it, 
and they came within less than one vote to get a two-thirds vote for a 
draft convention to make it eight hours for everybody on board a ship 
wherever she was. 

Mr. Mills. How did the British representatives vote ? 

Mr. Furuseth. They voted aye, some of them, and some of them 

voted no. , J _ ,, T 

Mr. Chindblom. What do you mean by one vote? Was that the 

vote of one nation or one individual? 

Mr. Furuseth. No ; one individual person. 

Mr. Hardy. How many representatives did Great Britain have 

Mr. Furtjseth. Four. She had four from England, Ireland, Scot¬ 
land,* Wales; four from Canada, and four from Australia. 

Mr. Bankhead. Did New Zealand have any ? 


404 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know. I would have to look that up. i 
think New Zealand and Australia came together; I am not sure. 

Mr. Chindblom. India? 

Mr. Furuseth. India; yes. 

Mr. Davis. And British South Africa? 

Mr. Furuseth. British South Africa; yes. 

Mr. Bankhead. How did the majority of the British representa¬ 
tives vote? 

Mr. Furuseth. In favor of the draft convention. 

Mr. Chindblom. If we had been there, we would have had four 
votes ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Edmonds. Did the representatives of the owners vote for it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Some of the representatives from some of the 
companies voted for it, and some of the representatives of the owners 
from some companies voted against it. 

Mr. Edmonds. How about the English representatives? 

Mr. Furuseth. The representatives of the English shipowners 
voted no. I think one of the representatives of the owners from 
Canada voted yes; I can not tell you that, because I left the record; 
but that is easy to be found. The record is easy to be got through 
these books here. 

Now, I want to call your attention in connection with the Lakes 
to the fact that Canada is a member of that international confer¬ 
ence, and that convention in Genoa adopted a draft convention under 
which Canada is to employ her people on inland waters only 8 
hours in 24. 

Mr. Chindblom. That was not adopted, was it? 

Mr. Furuseth. It was; on inland waters it was adopted. It was 
on the ocean that it was not adopted. On inland waters it was 
adopted and was unanimous. 

Mr. Edmonds. I suppose the representatives from all of the non 
maritime nations were enthusiastic in favor of a 48-hour week, were 
they not? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know; I should say not. I should say, 
as a general proposition, that the shipowners voted no; that those 
representing the personnel voted yes; and those representing the 
nations, as such, mixed their votes up, split in one way or another. 
The shipowner, of course, is not anxious to give his employees 8 hours 
instead of 12, a 48-hour week or a 56-hour instead of 84. That goes 
without saying. There are shipowners that are good men, mighty 
good men, and a good many of them are good men, and they would 
like to do the best they could for the men they employ, but they 
have got to trot in the same trot that other shipowners keep, and 
when they speak as a body, or are represented as a body, of course, 
the minority, who would do much better if they could, are not per¬ 
mitted to do it. The shipowner is just like any other human being. 
If you would strip him and me we would look alike, 

Mr. Bankhead. I would like to hear about that wage feature, 
because that is going to be a very important question before Congress 
when this maritime legislation is considered. 

Mr. Furuseth. Here you have got in this book the record of 
what they actually did in Genoa and Brussels in 1920, and here you 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 405 


have got a piece of a draft convention that I would like to read to 
you because of its bearing upon the Lakes. [Reading:] 

In view of the declaration in the treaties of peace that all industrial commun- 
ties should endeavor to adopt, so far as their special circumstances will permit, 
an 8-hour day or a 48-hour week as a standard to be aimed at where it has 
n<»t already been attained, the International Labor Conference recommends: 

1 hat each member of the International Labor Organization— 

that is, each nation mentioned here; they adopted this tentative 
draft convention, in which they specifically said that on inland 
waters—and these gentlemen are talking about inland waters— they 
hre not to employ their men more than 48 hours a week. 

Mr. Scott. Read it out of the book. I would like to have it. 

Mr. Chindblom. Can you read that section? 

Mr. Furuseth. Of course; I can read all you want me to read, 
if you will give me time. 

Mr. Chindblom. Read that section for the record. 

Mr. Furuseth (reading) : 

The General Conference of the International Labor Organizatiton of the 
League of Nations, 

Having been convened at Genoa by the governing body of the International 
Labor Office on the 15th day of June, 1920, and 

Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to the 
“Application t.o seamen of the convention drafted at Washington last Novem¬ 
ber, limiting the hours of work in all industrial undertakings, including trans¬ 
port by sea and, under conditions to be determined, transport by inland water¬ 
ways, to 8 hours in the day and 48 in the week. Consequential effects as 
regards manning and the regulations relating to accommodations and health 
on board ship,” which is the first item the agenda for the Genoa meeting 
of the conference; and 

Having determined these proposals shall take the form of a recommenda¬ 
tion, adopts the following recommendation, to be submitted to the members of 
the International Labor Organization for consideration with a view to effect 
being given to it by national legislation or otherwise, in accordance with the 
labor part of the treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, of the treaty of St. 
Germain of September 10, 1919, of the treaty of Neuilly of November 27, 1919, 
and of the treaty of the Grand Trianon of June 4, 1920: 

In view of the declaration in the treaties of peace that all industrial com¬ 
munities should endeavor to adopt, so far as their special circumstances will 
permit, “ an 8-hour day or a 48-hour week is a standard to be aimed at where 
it has not already been attained,” the International Labor Conference recom¬ 
mends : 

“ I. That each member of the International Labor Organization should, if 
it has not already done so, enact legislation limiting in the direction of the 
above declaration in the treaties of peace the hours of work of workers em¬ 
ployed in inland navigation, with such special provisions as may be necessary 
to meet the climatic and industrial conditions peculiar to inland navigation in 
each country, and after consultation with the organizations of employers and 
the organizations of workers concerned. 

“ II. That those members of the International Labor Organization whose 
territories are riparian to waterways which are used in common by their 
boats should enter into agreements for limiting in the direction of the afore¬ 
said declaration the hours of work of persons employed in inland navigation 
on such waterways, after consultation with the organizations of employers 
and the organizations of workers concerned. 

“ hi. That such national legislation and such agreements between riparian 
countries ” * * * 

Do you want the rest of it? 

Mr. Hardy. We want the definite part that fixed the hours. 

Mr. Furuseth. Thev mention eight hours twice. 


406 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. Scott. You are reading now from a resolution that was pre¬ 
sented to the International Labor Conference at Genoa? 

Mr. Furuseth. From a resolution that was adopted. 

Mr. Scott. At that labor conference was America represented? 

Mr. Furuseth. No, sir; America was not represented. 

Mr. Scott. Who were at that conference ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I was there, as I am here. 

Mr. Scott. But you are reading from a report of the labor con¬ 
ference, are you ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I am reading from an international conference 
called by all the nations of the world outside of the United States. 

Mr. Mills. I think I can make it clear, although I again wish to 
point out, Mr. Chairman, that w r e are wandering very far afield, 
that the League of Nations as adopted at Versailles provided for an 
international labor conference to be held at stated intervals, with 
a given number of delegates from each country representing labor 
and the employers. 

Now, the first conference was held in Washington a year and a 
half ago, and the second conference Avas held in Genoa. When Mr. 
Furuseth said that the decision of the conference would be binding 
on the LTnited States, if adopted by the conference, I think he made a 
mistake. 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not say it Avould be binding. 

Mr. Mills. My recollection is that the recommendations of the 
conference Avould not be binding, but they would haA r e to be confirmed 
by the respective Go\ 7 ernments of each country. 

Mr. Hardy. There is no question about that. 

Mr. Mills. In his original statement he said that a two-thirds 
A 7 ote would haA r e established the eight-hour day without the appro A r al 
of the nations participating in the conference. 

Mr. Furuseth. No, no, no. 

Mr. Mills. It ought to be entirely clear that this would be simply 
a recommendation which would be binding on the nations attending 
the conference. 

Mr. Furuseth. May I permitted to explain? 

Mr. Mills. Just let me complete ni}^ statement, as long as we have 
gotten into this question. I note that in Genoa—and I think it is 
rather significant—that with the exception of one of the labor repre¬ 
sentatives, Mr. Wilson, the representative of Great Britain, Sir Mon¬ 
tague Barlow, Mr. HipA\ 7 ood, and Sir Alfred Booth voted in the 
negative. I call the committee’s attention also the fact that the rep¬ 
resentatives of Japan, Mr. Uchida, Mr. Hori, and the entire delega¬ 
tion voted in the negatAe on the eight-hour day proposition. 

Mr. Furuseth. No; one moment, please. Was that on the ques¬ 
tion of inland navigation or on the question of ocean navigation ? 

Mr. Mills. I take it that is ocean navigation. 

Mr. Furuseth. I said that was not adopted. 

Mr. Mills. No; but the great shipping nations of the world, our 
two chief competitors, voted practically unanimously against this 
proposition. 

Mr. Furuseth. I want to say, in order to clear up this thing, that 
1 do not Avant to be put in the position of stating something that is 
not a fact. I stated that a two-thirds vote would adopt a draft con¬ 
vention. Noav, morally, the nations are bound to adopt that. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 407 

Mr. Mills. No. 

Mr. Furuseth. I say morally they are, because it says so in the 
treaty, and they have been talldng on that question in the Senate 
for a year. 

Mr. Mills. The treaty specifically says it has to be ratified. 

Mr. Furusetii. I say legally they are not bound to do so. but 
let me say to the gentleman that I was present in Paris when the 
constitution for that very thing was adopted, the labor section of the 
League of Nations, and I had a hand in preventing something, 
although I was not a member. Again I was there as I am here, on 
the outside, lobbying the best way I knew how. 

Mr. Mills. Well, that is pretty good. 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, then, I know what they did there, and I 
know what it reads. As a matter of fact, it reads this way, that if 
they fail to adopt it within one year the League of Nations may take 
steps to make them, if they feel like it. 

Mr. Hardy. Is that a part of the labor plan? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is a part of the labor plan. Now, it says 
further that the League of Nations makes itself responsible for the 
ivorking condition of every man in every country with which they 
have financial or commercial relations, whether they are in the 
League of Nations or not, and that they will employ the boycott, 
or exclusive trading for the purpose, if they want to, of compelling 
them to obey. And I was one of the men who used whatever force 
I had to prevent that kind of thing. 

Mr. Mills. Let me ask you who was the leading representative 
of the United States at that conference? 

Mr. Furuseth. At that labor conference? 

Mr. Mills. At the conference in Paris which drafted this labor 
convention. 

Mr. Furuseth. Mr. Gompers was the chairman of it. 

Mr. Mills. Eepresenting the United States? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. You say you opposed that particular proposition? 

Mr. Furuseth. I opposed it in Paris. I wrote a letter to Presi¬ 
dent Wilson against it, and I stood alone, absolutely alone in the 
American Federation of Labor convention at Atlantic City, fight¬ 
ing it, and had myself put in the position of being ostracized be¬ 
cause of my position. 

Mr. Mills. I congratulate you. 

Mr. Furuseth. I am not accustomed, Mr. Congressman, to count 
the costs, as long as it is a question of me. I followed the soul, my 
convictions; I do not count the costs, as far as I am concerned, but it 
was a terrible temptation to me at that convention. I did not know 
but what I would lose every friend I had or every friend the seamen 
had. President Wilson, some members of the Cabinet, some Mem¬ 
bers in the Senate, and some in the House, were for that thing, and 
they knew me. Some of them had been friendly to me, and yet I 
had to take a position against what I knew they wanted. For three 
days I debated with myself as to what to do, and something in me 
cried, “ You must do it! You must do it! ” And I did it. As it was, 
it turned out all right. Those gentlemen were too generous to visit 
any penalty upon the seamen because of what I had done. 


408 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. Now, come back to section 2 of the bill. Just give the 
changes proposed. 

Mr. Furuseth. There is one in here that is so important to the 
United States that I hope you gentlemen will let it go in so you will 
understand it, because back of all this struggle that has gone on here 
in this country, including the Lakes themselves, is this thing here. 

Mr. Bankhead. What is that ? 

Mr. Furuseth. It is the incorporation papers of the International 
Shipping Federation (Ltd.), with members of the executive board 
in each shipping nation, with representatives of each nation and in 
the United States also. Under this thing they meet and they deter¬ 
mine their international policies which they are to follow, and then 
the shipowners of each particular nation go to their governments to 
bring that policy into actual operation. Here is their incorporation 
paper and the men who signed it, their officers, taken from the official 
records in the record office in London. 

Mr. Bankhead. You offer that for the record? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. And it specifically states there, too, so that 
they can control legislation, regulations, and everything dealing with 
shipping in every country in the world. 

The Chairman. All right; I think that ought to go in the record. 

(The matter referred to is as follows:) 

The Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1908. 

COMPANY LIMITED BY GUARANTY AND NOT HAVING A CAPITAL DIVIDED INTO SHARES. 

[Memorandum of Association of the International Shipping Federation (Ltd.).] 

1. The name of the company (hereinafter called “the company”) is the 
International Shipping Federation (Ltd.). 

2. The registered office of the company will be situate in England. 

3. The objects for which the company is established are: 

(1) To federate for the purposes hereinafter expressed or some of them 
associations of shipowners, formed for the support or protection of shipowners 
or the promotion or defense of their interests, and associations formed by ship¬ 
owners or other persons, or for any other objects which the company shall con¬ 
sider analogous or conducive, and whether incorporated or not incorporated, 
and whether formed in the United Kingdom or abroad and whether already 
existing or hereafter formed and their nominees. 

(2) To consider all questions affecting the interests of the shipping trade 
and other trades connected therewith, and to do all such things as may seem 
expedient with a view to the promotion of such interests. 

(3) To procure the adoption, improvement, repeal, abrogation, or alteration 
of any laws, maritime contracts, usages, and customs in relation to such trades 
which it may seem' to the company desirable to adopt, improve, repeal, abro¬ 
gate, or alter and to oppose, delay, and resist any enactments, rules, regulations, 
by-laws, customs, or usages which may seem adverse to the interests of such 
trade or any department thereof. 

(4) To indemnify any persons and companies interested in the shipping 
trades or other trades connected therewith against losses, liabilities, and 
contingencies in relation to any such trade and generally to carry on any kind 
of guarantee and indemnity business other than employers’ liability insurance. 

(5) To establish and maintain in any parts of the world bureaus or registries 
for engaging the services, whether in relation to navigation or management 
of ships or vessels or in loading or discharge of cargoes or any other opera¬ 
tions, whether on land or sea, of officers, managers, stewards, clerks, mes¬ 
sengers, servants, seamen, firemen, laborers, and other persons employed' 
in any such business, and for collecting and supplying information to members 
of the company and others in relation to any of the said businesses, and to 
supply such services and information accordingly, whether gratuitously or 
otherwise, as may be deemed expedient. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 409 


(6) To communicate with any other like federation, association, or company, 
whether incorporated or not, in any parts of the world, and concert with it in 
promoting measures of any kind which the company is authorized to promote. 

(7) To diffuse among the members information on all matters affecting 
the shipping trade, and to print, publish, issue, and circulate such papers, 
periodicals, books, circulars, and other literary undertakings as may seem 
conducive to any of these objects. 

(8) To raise funds for any of the purposes of the company, whether by 
entrance fees or periodical subscriptions from members or voluntary contribu¬ 
tions from members or other persons or othewise. 

(9) To purchase, take on lease or in exchange, hire, or otherwise acquire 
any real or personal property and any rights or privileges which the company 
may think desirable, and to hold, build upon, manage, improve, and develop, 
and to sell, lease, mortgage, or otherwise dispose of any such real or personal 
property rights or privileges for any estate or interest therein. 

(10) To construct, equip, maintain, and alter or reconstruct any building 
or works necessary or convenient for the purpose of the company. 

(11) To invest and deal with any moneys of the company not immediately 
required in such manner as may be determined. 

(12) To borrow or raise and secure the payment of money in such manner 
as the company shall think fit. 

(13) To undertake and execute any trust the undertaking whereof may seem 
desirable, and either gratuitously or otherwise. 

(14) To transfer all or any part of the undertaking, assets, and liabilities 
of the company to any federation or association having objects altogether or 
In part similar to those of the company, or to amalgamate with any sciety or 
association having objects altogether or in part similar to those of the company. 

(15) To enter into any agreement with any authority, supreme, local, munici¬ 
pal, or otherwise, or any association or company, incorporated or unincorpo¬ 
rated, in furtherance of any of the objects of the company, and to obtain 
from any such authority, association, or company any rights or privileges 
which may seem conducive to any of the objects of the company. 

(16) To admit any members, whether eligible or not for membership, to be 
honorary members of the company, and to confer on any person contributing to 
the funds of the company without constituting them members, such rights and 
privileges as may be legally granted to persons not being members of the com¬ 
pany and on such terms as may be expedient. 

(17) To do all such other lawful things as are identical or conducive to the 
attainment of the above objects or any of them. 

4. The liability of the members is limited. 

5. Every member of the company undertakes to contribute to the assets of 
the company in event of the same being wound up during the time that he is a 
member or within one year afterwards for payment of the debts and liabilities 
of the company contracted before the time at which he ceases to be a member, 
and the costs, charges, and expenses of winding up the same and for the adjust¬ 
ment of the rights of the contributories amongst themselves such amount as 
may be required, not exceeding £1,000. 

COMPOSITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING FEDERATION (LTD.)-BOARD OF 

DIRECTORS. 

Britain: E. Pembroke, 34 Leadenhall Street, London, E. C., shipowner. 

Sweden: A. O. Wilson, Goteborg, shipowner. 

Germany: P. Ehlers, Hamburg, shipowner and doctor of law. 

Denmark: O. Kronman, Copenhagen, chairman Danish Shipping Federation. 

Holland: .T. Yisser, Rotterdam, delegate for Shipping Federation of Holland. 

Belgium: J. Langlois, Antwerp, ship broker. 

Holland: .T. Vink, Amsterdam, shipowner. 

COPY OF THE REGISTER OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING 
FEDERATION (LTD.)-NAME, ADDRESS, AND OCCUPATION. 

Jacques Langlois, 7 Quai Van Dyck, Antwerp, average adjuster. 

Maurice Ortmane, 15 Canal des Brasseurs, Antwerp, ship broker. 

K. Reinhard, Borsen, Copenhagen, shipowner. 

A. O. Anderson, 22 Ameliegade, Copenhagen, shipowner. 


410 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

C. Leist, Norddeutscher Lloyd, Hamburg, shipowner. 

Paul Ehlers, Adolphsbrucke 2, Hamburg, doctor of law. 

J. Vink, Messrs. Budig, Voder & Co., Amsterdam, ship brokers. 

L. Indebeton, Sveriges, Redareforen'ng, Goteborg, master mariner. 

A. O. Wilson, Sveriges, Redaregorening, Goteborg, shipowner. 

Thomas L. Devitt, 13 Fenchurch Avenue, London, E. C., shipowner. 

T. F. Harrison, 67 South John Street, Liverpool, shipowner. 

R. M. Hudson, Tavistock House, Sunderland, shipowner. 

Henry Radcliffe, the Docks, Cardiff, shipowner. 

Sir Walter Runciman, bart, Masonic Building, Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-on- 
Tyne, shipowner. 

F. S. Watts, 7 Whittington Avenue, London, E. C., shipowner. 

J. Visser. Messrs. Wambersie & Son, Rotterdam, ship broker. 

Mr. Edmonds. Is that a financial concern, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Edmonds. How did it come out? Is that the outcome of the 
League of Nations? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; that has existed for 20 years. First, it was 
incorporated as the British Federation (Ltd.), and then some 8 
years ago—the date of incorporation is here—some 8 or 10 years ago 
they changed to the International Shipping Federation (Ltd.), and 
the Lake Carriers’ Association. Mr. Harry Golder, I have been told 
by some of the men from the Lakes, went over to study the conditions, 
and to study the way they were doing business, and he came back and 
they established the system of controlling seamen that is now carried 
on by the Lake Carriers’ Association, including the book that a man 
had to carry in order to get employment, and under which he black 
listed himself, or had to carry his own black list with him, if he did 
not lose the book altogether. » 

Mr. Mills. Now, Mr. Chairman, I press my point of order, that 
the bill is before us, and that the witness should confine himself to 
the bill. 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, then, gentlemen, section 2 changes the present 
law so that on the Lakes, on the Pacific, on the Atlantic, in the coast¬ 
wise trade, there is no necessity for any more than two watches on 
any but a very few vessels, because there are no vessels except a few. 
There are only a few vessels that do travel any greater distance than 
they can travel in 16 hours on one steady run, one steady, continuous 
run. That has been explained here as to what that means. 

And I want to say that the shipowner construes these things, and 
the court construes them, and the court takes this view, as a usual 
proposition. They give the construction that is most favorable to the 
shipowner, unless Congress has been absolute and definite in its state¬ 
ment. Two times the Supreme Court did that with reference to the 
seamen’s act, and then Congress amended it so as to show what they 
had intended. 

Now, then, let us see that section 2. For one year or two years 
the sailors have had three watches. Before that they had two; before 
that we had none. As a matter of fact, we have never had the watch 
provision of the seamen’s act carried out enough. 

I have got a Senate document here on the question of wages and 
watches. The law says that the sailors shall be divided into at least 
two watches, which shall be on deck successively for the usual work 
of operating the vessel. Now, whenever there 'is any danger to the 
vessel the sailor works night and day until he drops, and everybody 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN J S ACT. 411 

on board ship does it, and has to do it, because he is fighting for his 
life, fighting for the preservation of the property, and there is not 
any question about hours or labor in that case. But in the common, 
every day work of handling the vessel 12 hours, 7 days in the week, 
84 hours a week—that is the sailor. Three watches, 8 hours a day, 
56 hours a week for oilers, water tenders, and firemen—that is the 
present law. Through arrangements with the shipowners we got 
three watches. We have had them for a year and a half, or about 20 
months. That is to be taken away. All right. This bill proposes to 
put the oilers and water tenders who are in the fireroom and engine 
room on the same hours of labor as the sailor, 12 hours a day, 84 hours 
a week, in the fireroom and the engine room. That is the amendment 
to section 2. 

The amendment to section 13 is to change the law so that we begin 
again at 40 per cent for able seamen all over the world. After this 
bill passes we begin at 40 per cent again and then go up, year by 
year, for another six years, to get 65 per cent. 

Gentlemen, you have it in your power to do that kind of thing, but 
I have burned the midnight oil for 30 j^ears and learned something 
about history, and I will tell you that when you do those things 
such as are calculated to be done now, when you do those things 
that are calculated to be done outside of this room now, you are 
burying the American merchant marine as absolutely as if you were 
dropping the clods of earth upon its coffin. 

We will go to section 13. The Lakes do not need to have any able 
seamen at all! Whenever they are permitted to have something else 
they will have something else because it is cheaper. They want the 
able seamen abolished because it narrows the field from which they 
can take their employees. We want the able seamen retained be¬ 
cause of our own safety, the public’s safety, and because we do not 
want to do the work for somebody else, and we want it because it 
helps us in every way, including in our organization. I want to tell 
you, gentlemen, that our organization is a means to an end, and if 
the law is not enforced we will abandon the organization and will 
want to tear it into a thousand pieces. It does not exist as a job 
trust. 

Mr. Edmonds. This bill does not change that percentage required ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; it reduces it from 65 per cent, which it is 
to-day, to 45 per cent. 

Mr. Edmonds. It does not anything of the kind; it can not. 

Mr. Furuseth. How is that? 

Mr. Edmonds. It is impossible. This is simply an amendment 
made to the bill. It does not change the section at all. The section 
as originally written stands with the exception of this provision 
put in here. 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Edmonds. The provision is the amendment. 

Mr. Furuseth. I am very sorry, Mr. Congressman, to disagree 
with you, and still more sorry to have the Attorney General of the 
United States disagree with you and the court of appeals of New 
York disagree with you, because we had exactly that kind of section, 
we had exactly that kind of an amendment to a law dealing with 
forecastles, and the court held- 

Mr. Mills. Which court? 


412 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. The court of appeals. 

Mr. Jefferis. What items, on page 4? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is another thing; that has nothing to do 
with the bill. That is simply a matter of construction there. I said 
this, that the courts will hold, and has held already, that with an 
amendment of that kind the bill will begin again at 40 per cent after 
the passage of this bill. 

Mr. Edmonds. That is about the percentage we have of American 
seamen now? 

Mr. Furuseth. It is not the percentage of Americans you have; 
it is a little more than that. But let me suggest to you that you have 
only got the Americans you have because you changed the conditions. 

Mr. Edmonds. T do not think there is any intention on the part 
of Mr. Scott to change this percentage at all. It may be that the 
wording is wrong there. 

Mr. Furuseth I do not know what his intention is. I want to 
say to you that I do not blame Mr. Scott. Mr. Scott does not know 
what his bill contains. He did not draw it. He does not know what 
it contains. Somebody else drew it. 

Mr. Scott. Well, now, I am perfectly willing that you shall go 
almost any limit, but that statement is absolutely false. 

Mr. Furuseth. Did you not, Mr. Scott, say here that you did not 
have any intention to apply it to the coast or ocean ? 

Mr. Scott. I drew this bill this year, and I insist it does not have 
any application to the coastwise trade or the ocean trade; if it has 
any application to them, then I shall ask that it be changed. But as 
far as the bill is concerned, you have made the statement here that 
somebody drew it, and the inference is that some British syndicate 
or some American organization- 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Scott. Any inference might be drawn. 

Mr. Furuseth. The employers’ association in New York. 

Mr. Scott. Will you bear with me for a moment ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Sure. 

Mr. Scott. I introduced this same bill almost verbatim four years 
ago. At that time the suggestion came entirely out of my own mind. 
Every word in the bill was drawn by me, at my own suggestion, and 
at the solicitation of no living soul except the people who live in my 
section of the country. Now, subsequently they held a conference at 
Detroit at which every board of commerce in mv home State of any 
size was represented. There were 144 men at that conference. They 
submitted a bill which complied exactly with the bill that I had 
drafted several years ago, and I then resubmitted the bill in its pres¬ 
ent form, and as far as its being suggested by the employers, the 
employees, or any syndicate or association is concerned, that state¬ 
ment is not correct. 

Mr. Furuseth. Take the bill that you introduced before, Mr. 
Scott, and compare the two, and you will find that there is this fun¬ 
damental difference, that your bill before applied to the Lakes and 
the Lakes alone. The bill you have introduced now applies to the 
ocean, to the Lakes, and to the coast. That is the difference, and 
all you have got to do is to take the two bills and put alongside of 
each other. Now, of course, I can only attribute that situation to the- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 413 


fact, as I said, that you did not know all that was in your bill, because 
I do not for one moment, and would not suggest for a single second 
that you would mislead this committee or anybody, so the other horn 
of the dilemma is that you did not know, and that was not intended 
as an insult in any way. 

Mr. Scott. Maybe that is true. I admit I am not infallible; but 
as far as my ability will allow me, I have drafted this law to apply 
solely to the Great Lakes, and I think the committee will accept my 
Statement of the fact; if it is necessary to change it there are a 
number of very able lawyers on the committee who will so phrase it 
that it will exclusively confine its operation to the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Maclean. Mr. Scott, may I say that the Employers’ Associa¬ 
tion of Detroit was not even represented at the Detroit conference, 
and were not even invited'? They were not there. 

Mr. Furuseth. So your employers’ organization took the thing 
and swallowed it? 

Mr. Maclean. What employers’ association? The conference con¬ 
sisted of representatives of the boards of commerce on the Great 
Lakes. The Detroit Employers’ Association were not invited and 
was not there. 

Mr. Furuseth. Then the Detroit Employers’ Association had 
nothing to do with the drafting of it? 

Mr. Maclean. Absolutely nothing. 

Mr. Furuseth. In other words, that is to say, that having nothing 
to do with the drafting of it it was referred, without explanation, to 
you, and you did not examine further into it but simply indorsed it; 
is not that true? 

Mr. Free. Mr. Chairman, I do not care whether the Employers’ 
Association or whether the unions were responsible for the introduc¬ 
tion of this bill. I wish the testimony would be confined to the pro¬ 
visions of the bill and that the witness would forget all the side 
issues. 

Mr. Hardy. Give us the effect of the bill. 

Mr. Furuseth. The effect of the bill, as far as section 13 is con¬ 
cerned, the practical effect will be this, that just as the Lake ship¬ 
owners in the past could go to any district of the country, or else¬ 
where, for that matter, so far as the immigration laws permitted it, 
to obtain men to serve on the vessels, regardless of whether they had 
ever been to sea before or not, or ever had been on the Lakes or not, 
or ever had their foot on board a vessel or not, and were the sole 
judges, so they will be the sole judges in the practical operation of 
this & bill, because all that a certificated lifeboat man has to do is to 
pull a couple of oars reasonably well, and any boy around the Lakes 
or around the river, if he is not a dunce, can do that, and that is all 

he knows. . 1 w A 

Now. then, let us see w 7 hat it means with regard to safety: A life¬ 
boat is manned by from 7 to 15 men, according to its size. There are 
three oars in a lifeboat that carries 30 people—I am not absolutely 
correct in that, I suppose, but a lifeboat that carries 30 people will 
have three oars on one side and three on the other. It maycarry 40 
people, but usually the manning of a lifeboat is from 6 to 7. There 
may be small lifeboats that go down to 5. with 2 men on each sideand 
1 man to steer. Now, in order to land that boat, as it was testified 


414 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

in the hearings and was understood and agreed, there must be 1 man 
in that boat who knows how to use a steering oar. 

Mr. Edmonds. Does not section 6 take care of that by saying that 
an able seaman or certificated lifeboat man shall be placed in charge 
of the boat ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; but that is amended in section 14 here. That 
is amended in this bill so that there will be nobody there who really 
knows, except the licensed officers, and there is a Avhole lot that a 
licensed officer does not know either. The pitiful thing of it all is 
that the standard of skill of a seaman has gone down to such a terrible 
degree that there are a very few seamen that know their business as 
they should know it, either the officers or anybody else, and we have 
been trying to build that up, but with the employers under no regu¬ 
lations at all and no standards at all it will go down further still, and 
that is the practical operation and practical result of this legisla¬ 
tion—to destroy Avhatever skill you have and to absolutely do nothing 
to build it up. 

Mr. Hardy. As I understand you, you mean that the provision on 
page 4 that on the Great Lakes and on their connecting waters certifi¬ 
cated lifeboat men may be used in lieu of able seamen will do away 
with the necessity for any able seamen on the Lakes. 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolute^. There will not be any able seamen 
employed; there will not be anj^ able seamen on the Lakes at all. 

Mr. Mills. Are there any able seamen on the Canadian boats ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. Have they any such law as this ? 

Mr. Furuseth. They have got certificates, I was just told. If you 
will look at section 14 of the seamen’s act, you will find stated there 
that every foreign nation vessel that comes to the United States will 
be subject to the same identical law as an American vessel. 

Mr. Mills. I know that. 

Mr. Furuseth. With regard to life-saving equipment and the 
manning of the same. 

Mr. Mills. Yes; but now answer my question. Is there any Cana¬ 
dian law providing that 65 per cent of the deck crew shall be able 
seamen ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not think there is, so far as I know. 

Mr. Mills. Yet the Canadian boats operating on the Lakes do have 
able seamen. 

Mr. Furuseth. Because they come into American ports. 

Mr. Mills. Well, did they have able seamen prior to the passage 
of the seamen’s bill ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Mills. The Canadian boats never did? 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Cliindblom. How could they run; how did they run? 

Mr. Furuseth. They ran with such men as they could get. Some¬ 
times, of course, they had a man to steer that could steer. 

Mr. Mills. Well, is any attempt made to enforce this law as against 
the Canadian boats? 

Mr. Furuseth. In my opinion, there is not. That is the trouble. 
If it was enforced against the Canadian boats, these men would not 
be here to complain so much as they are. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 415 

?f r * ^J ILLS * But; it is not enforced against the Canadian boats? 

Mr. Furuseth. Very little. 

Mr. Mills. Therefore the Canadian boats do not have able seamen 
because of this law ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do know that the inspector in Buffalo asked me 
this question, if the certificate that the Canadian seaman had should 
be recognized, or did we recognize it. I said, “ I do not know; that 
is up to you. So that is how I came to know that the able seamen 
have certificates in Canada, because of the fact that the inspector 
was questioning those men as to their ability, and finding out if the 
certificates that we got- 

Mr. Mills. That is not necessarily so, because he might be rated 
as an able seaman without having complied with the provision re¬ 
quiring a service of three years on a vessel. 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. O’Brien. Eighteen months. 

Mr. Furuseth. No; they would not; not under the English law, 
and the English law runs in Canada. 

Mr. Hardy. The law says— 

That foreign vessels leaving ports of the United States shall comply with the 
rules herein prescribed as to life-saving appliances, their equipment, and the 
manning of same. 

That is the law, if it was enforced, and somebody ought to be made 
to enforce it. 

Mr. Mills. It does not apply to the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. Furuseth. You see, the British law dealing with the person¬ 
nel applies to every vessel under the British flag. 

Mr. O’Brien. Under the British law a man can not become an 
able seaman- 

Mr. Furuseth. Except after three years’ experience. 

Mr. Mills. When was that law passed ? 

Mr. Furuseth. 1906. 

Mr. Mills. In the testimony before the Senate committee in 1913 
it appears that whereas the British law rated as an able seaman a 
man who had served three years, it was merely a classification, and 
there was no British law which compelled a vessel to carry a certain 
number of them. 

Mr. Furuseth. That was all they knew about it at that time, and 
that was all I knew about it at that time. And I sent to England for 
the law dealing with vessels, and 1 found that in all vessels known 
as immigrant ships they must carry 75 per cent—not 55 per cent, 
but 75 per cent—of able seamen; and the English articles, outside of 
immigrant ships, do not rate a man as an able seaman; they simply 
put the rating of seaman. It is not an able seaman. 

Mr. Mills. But outside of the so-called immigrant ships, the Brit¬ 
ish law- 

Mr. Furuseth. The British law does not compel the shipowner to 
carry any able seamen. That is the law. 

Mr. Chindblom. Are the Canadian ships running on the Great 
Lakes immigrant ships? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; certainly not. They are not compelled, under 
the Canadian law, unless it has happened in the last 12 months. 


416 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

Mr. Edmonds. Do the Canadian boats running from Port Arthur 
to Owen Sound carry any able seamen, the Canadian Pacific steamers 
running down to Georgian Bay ? They do not stop, do they ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Oil the Lakes? 

Mr. Edmonds. No ; the}^ do not stop at all, do they ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not suppose they do, sir. I am trying to keep 
up with the laws of the different nations, and I have no knowledge 
of Canada having passed any law compelling the Canadian vessels 
to have able seamen. 

Mr. Edmonds. You can not make those vessels have able seamen, 
because they do not use our ports, and yet they compete with our 
passenger lines. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not think that they come into our ports at all. 

Mr. Edmonds. No. 

Mr. Furuseth. If they do not come into our ports, you can not 
compel them to have able seamen. 

Mr. Edmonds. They take passengers from the Lake Superior ports 
down to Canada and run them through to Toronto and deliver them 
in Buffalo, just the same as we carry them on our lines. 

Mr. Furuseth. Does the vessel deliver them there? 

Mr. Edmonds. No; the vessel leaves them at Owentown, and they 
take the rail from Toronto to Buffalo. 

Mr. Furuseth. Let me understand this. They take them at Cana¬ 
dian ports? 

Mr. Edmonds. At Port Arthur; yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. And deliver them at Canadian ports? 

Mr. Edmonds. At Owenstown; yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. And then they go by rail over to the American 
side ? 

Mr. Edmonds. To Toronto, and come to Buffalo from there. 

Mr. Furuseth. Then that kind of a vessel would not be compelled 
to have able seamen under the law, as I understand it. 

Mr. Edmonds. And yet they compete with our liners. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not see how they do. 

Mr. Edmonds. They take people from the Lake Superior ports and 
deliver them in Toronto. 

Air. Furuseth. On the British side. I think it was testified here, 
and I do not know but what it is true, that there may be some order 
in council. You know England has peculiar laws, and they will 
pass an order in council. It may be that they have absolute coast¬ 
wise protection against American ships or any other ships in Canada. 
Now, I do not know whether that is so or not. 

Air. Edmonds. They have coastwise protection? 

Mr. Furuseth. They can not be competing at all, because an 
American ship can not carry a passenger from one Canadian port 
to another. 

Air. Chindblom. \ r ou speak of orders in council. Orders in council 
in England have the force of law, do they not ? 

Air. Furuseth. Exactly. I said I do not know what kind of 
orders in council have been issued or may not have issued. What they 
have written into law I am trying to keep up with. 

Air. Chindblom. They killed our China trade by an order in 
council, or tried to do it. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 417 

Mr. Furuseth. I have not any doubt about it. The fact of the 
matter is that I know too well that some people are now trying to 
kill the whole merchant marine of the United States in other direc¬ 
tions by an order in council. It may be that they have already issued 
an order in council so far as I know, because I am not the father 
confessor of any of those people. I know what they are doing as I 
know 1 am standing here. 

Now, if you have heard all that you want to hear about section 13, 
the next section that this bill amends is the safety section, pure and 
simple, dealing with life-saving appliances and the manning of 
those life-saving appliances. 

Now, then, let me give you what the law was before this bill passed, 
and what the law is now, and then remember what the law will be 
when you cut it in two or more. The present law gives the board of 
supervising inspectors, with the approval of the Secretary of Com¬ 
merce, the power to make regulations for safety by determining the 
number of men to be employed, but sets no standard of skill or ex¬ 
perience for the men so employed except as to licensed officers, and to 
determine the kind and the number of life-saving appliances such as 
davits, lifeboats, and rafts, leaving the standard of such appliance to 
be set by regulation. 

Let us see what changes the law makes. That thing is changed 
in this law by setting a standard for able seamen. That is the new 
part of the law. 

Then it says that on the ocean every person shall be an able sea¬ 
man after three years’ service on deck at sea, or on the Great Lakes; 
and that on the Lakes a person shall be an able seaman after he has 
had eight months’ service on the deck of a vessel to which the sec¬ 
tion applies. 

Section C provides for service in the Navy. There is nothing in 
the old law about that. Then, there is section B. There is nothing 
in the old law about that. Then comes section C. There is nothing in 
the old law about that. 

Section D deals with persons holding diplomas from colleges, etc. 
There is nothing in the old law about that. Then, it provides how a 
person shall become a certificated lifeboat man. You know how he 
becomes one. There is nothing in the old law about that. 

Mr. Jeffeeis. What do you mean by the old law ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The law as it existed before the passage of the 
so-called seamen’s act. The fact of the matter is that the ship¬ 
owner on the Lakes, outside of the requirements of a few life-saving 
appliances—and I will show you how little they were—and outside 
of being compelled on certain vessels to have some officers, was left 
absolutely to his discretion in the treatment of his crew, absolutely 
so. It was left to him absolutely, and he treated them in such a way 
that the turnover was some 1,300. 

Mr. Briggs. One thousand three hundred what ? 

Mr. Furuseth. One thousand three hundred per cent. That is to 
say. it took 1,300 men to fill one job in eight months. 

'Mr. Hardy. You mean that a man would work a little while and 
then quit, and they would get another one? 

Mr. Furuseth. A man goes on board a vessel in Buffalo, and goes 
to Cleveland, and quits the boat in Cleveland and goes back to Buf- 

48420—21-27 


418 AMENDING SECTIONS 2 , 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

falo and leaves. They pick up anybody they can find, no matter 
'whether he has ever been to sea before or not, and no matter whether 
he does not know anything about anything. 

Let me deal one second here with the question of the Lake situa¬ 
tion, the weather situation. There has been so much talk about it 
here. Mr. Scott insists upon one thing, the shipowners insist upon 
another thing, and we insist upon a third thing. I want to say to 
you that if the shipowners are stating the truth now, then they did 
not tell all the truth to the committee when it had this under consid¬ 
eration before, because then they insisted that there was a tremen¬ 
dous difference between the condition of the water in the summer, 
in the fall, and in the spring, and as a result of that the safety regu¬ 
lations that we agreed to and that were adopted by the nations in 
London were so modified as to be what they are now on the Lakes, 
and that was done under the pressure there and the information fur¬ 
nished by the Lake people, the Lake employers. 

The question is what is the Lake situation? There is no need to 
argue that at all. There is a Weather Bureau here. That Weather 
Bureau can furnish this committee with the daily weather condition 
on the Lakes, the temperature of the water, the amount of snowfall, 
the amount of rainfall, and the temperature from day to day for the 
last 10 years, and it is altogether a waste of time to have somebody 
come here and say one thing and somebody else say another, when 
your Weather Bureau will give you the facts, and does not worry 
itself about whether it hurts this man or that man. It has not any 
particular interest, consequently all you have to do is to send to the 
Weather Bureau to get the real facts with reference to the weather 
conditions on the Lakes. 

Now, with reference to life-saving stations. Life-saving stations 
are placed in the United States for the purpose of protecting lives on 
vessels, saving men on shipwrecked vessels near the shore. That is 
their only purpose under the legislation. If the Lakes have such a 
wonderfully placid water, as your committee is urged to believe, why 
63 life-saving stations? If Saginaw Bay is such a placid place, and 
there is no danger, why five life-saving stations ? Why waste Ameri¬ 
can money ? What did the Congressmen from Michigan say to Con¬ 
gress, and what did the Senators from Michigan say to Congress 
when they got Congress to waste the money of the citizens in estab¬ 
lishing life-saving stations and paying life-saving crews around 
those places? Did they come and say that those places were placid, 
and that there was no danger? Surely not! Surely they did not 
come and deceive Congress. Surely all this cost is not all pork. 

Mr. Scott. One of them is located in my district, on Mackinac 
Island. They never had a vessel wrecked there since the island 
came up out of the lake; they never had a life lost there by ship¬ 
wreck. 

Mr. Furuseth. And vet there is a life-saving station there ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; there is a life-saving station at Mackinac Island. 

Mr. Furuseth. Then, excuse me. Somebody was hungry for pork. 

Mr. Scott. That is what they were, and it was put in there during 
the last administration, too. 

Mr. Furuseth. During the last administration? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; by the Democrats. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 419 

Mr. Edmonds. For the benefit of the new members of the com¬ 
mittee, let me say that the testimony Avas that the shore line of Lake 
Michigan was over 60,000 miles. Sixty-four life-saving stations 
would mean one every 30 miles, and if you are going to have life¬ 
saving stations at all, one every 30 miles is not too many. 

Mr. Furuseth. I am not complaining about the number of them 
at all, and I am not saying there are too many. I am saying that if 
the lakes have such wonderfully placid waters, and there is no dan¬ 
ger, then there ought not to be any, because it is a pure waste of 
money, and pure pork. 

Now, with regard to the standard for lifeboats, pontoons, and 
rafts that this bill provides for, as it stands. Before the law passed 
the standard was left to the supervising inspectors. Then the equip¬ 
ment of vessels consisted of lifeboats, pontoons, and rafts. The 
number and standard was left to the inspection service. Let me 
say that on the lakes, bays, and sounds, from October 15 to May 15, 
25 per cent are boats and 75 per cent are rafts for the maximum 
number of persons on board. That is during the winter months. 
From May 15 to October 15, 7-J per cent are boats, 22J per cent are 
rafts, and 70 per cent neither, for the maximum number of persons 
on board. That is how the law was. They changed it so as to read: 
From September 15 to May 15, 75 per cent shall be lifeboats and 25 
per cent life rafts, for all persons on board; from May 15 to Sep¬ 
tember 15, 20 per cent shall be lifeboats, 30 per cent life rafts, and 
50 per cent neither. Putting this thing a little different, how will 
it read? That the shipowners on the lakes are officially permitted 
by the Government to drown 70 per cent of the people that they 
have on board. 

Mr. Chindblom. Do you think that is a fair statement? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do absolutely, because when you make a law 
here, gentlemen, and take the responsibility off the shipowners, you 
serve as their conscience, you take the duty and the responsibility 
from them and you shoulder it yourselves. Now, then, you did not 
do that until this bill was passed; you left it with the inspection 
service. The inspection service, therefore, served as their conscience, 
and whenever any trouble came they said, “We had all the appli¬ 
ances that the regulations called for,” but they did not take care of 
any more than 30 per cent in any case, and left 70 per cent to be 
drowned. In other words, they had official permission to drown 70 
per cent of the people they carried. That sounds a little different, 
but it is a cold-blooded, brutal fact. 

Mr. Chindblom. You would have 100 per cent in the summer time, 
too, then? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; I do not think it is necessary in the summer 
time. I will take some risks, even if I were a Congressman, I would 
take some risks on that. I would not overburden them. 

Mr. Scott. Then you would legalize murder to the extent of 50 per 
cent ? 

Mr. Chindblom. You would drown 50 per cent in the summer, 
would you? 

Mr. Furuseth. I would take that chance. I do not think I would 
take the chance of 50 per cent, however, if I had to do with it. 

Mr. Chindblom. You would take it up to September 15th, but 
you would not take it on September 16th? 


420 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. But the present law calls for 20 per cent of life¬ 
boats, 30 per cent of life rafts, and 50 per cent of nothing. 

Mr. Chindblom. Fifty per cent what? 

Mr. Furuseth. Fifty per cent nothing, neither. That is what the 
law calls for now. We protested against making it that way because, 
in our opinion, it was not enough, but we finally accepted it because 
we could not help ourselves. And now the men that brought that con¬ 
dition about come here and urge you to make it still less. 

Mr. Hardy. But there are life belts and things of that sort so as 
to support a man a little while in the water, and that is something? 

Mr. Furuseth. The provision with regard to life belts is left ex¬ 
actly as it is here. 

Mr. Hardy. Wait one minute until I can ask my question. The 
difference between summer and winter Avas on the supposition that 
the people Avho got into the water might live until they Avere rescued 
in the summer time, whereas they could not do it in the winter ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Exactly, that Avas the philosophy of it. 

Now, let us take a life belt. It is composed of cork, or supposed to 
be cork. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it is tuly, and tuly is good as 
long as it is not too old, and it is made up as a Avaistcoat, and you put 
it on almost as a vestcoat, and then you tie the strings over here, OA~er 
your middle, about where that belt is. 

Mr. Edmonds. Mr. Furuseth, did we not haA r e that question up be¬ 
fore Avhen the bill was being considered, and go into the life-saving 
belt question, and the question of life presenters A^ery completely, and 
I understand the regulations now require that they shall be composed 
of cork, and that the tuly life preser\ T ers have been abolished ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I am not so sure about that. 

Mr. Edmonds, The regulations now require that they shall be com¬ 
posed of cork. 

Mr. Furuseth. The probability is, if tuly has been abolished, that 
it was because Congress did it. 

Mr. Edmonds. We did it. We found that the condition Avas very 
bad Avith regard to the life-belt service. 

Mr. Furuseth. You put that on, and, of course, it Avill keep you in 
the Avater for a little while if the water is not too cold, but let me show 
you gentlemen what happened Avhile you Avere discussing this bill, 
when Congress was discussing this bill. The Empress of Ireland , 
Avitli some 1,200 people on board, or more, Avas laying less than 3 miles 
offshore, just about 2 miles offshore in the St, Lawrence. She was 
run into by a Norwegian tramp and sunk. Help came there within 
tAvo hours, and yet a thousand people were dead by the time they were 
taken up out of the water. 

Mr. Scott. What kind of ship was that ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The Empress of Ireland , one of the finest passenger 
ships on the ocean. 

Mr. Scott. On the ocean? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. She was an American ship, Avas she? 

Mr. Furuseth. No ; English—the Empress of Ireland , running pas¬ 
sengers between Quebec and Great Britain. 

Mr. Scott. Then you are admitting that besides the equipment on 
the ship itself, and in vieAv of the fact that all during the summer time 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 421 

and up into November a ship is never out of sight of at least four 
ships, and that up to 21—you will admit that some assistance could 
come from the fleet of ships that are constantly traversing the Great 
Lakes ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; provided that the ship that comes to the 
rescue has anybody to lower the boats and handle the boats and help 
the people, but you are taking away here the only people who can 
do that. You are taking away the men who can handle the boats, 
low T er them in a hurry and get them off, because, mind you, the work¬ 
ing boat of a ship is not manned by a certificated lifeboat man, or 
a steward, or a flunky, or anybody else; the working boat that is 
lowered to save life in a general disaster is manned exclusively by 
able seamen. 

Mr. Scott. You are not going to utilize the 62 life-saving stations 
either ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Sixtv-three stations. 

Mr. Scott. I just called up the Coast Guard, and they told me they 
have 62, but if you say 63 - 

Mr. Furuseth. All right, they said 63 to these men yesterday. 
For the Lord’s sake ! I can not help that. 

Mr. Edmonds. Maybe they have closed that one on Mackinac 
Island since. 

Mr. Furuseth. The vessel was less than 3 miles offshore, laying 
to an anchor, if you please, with everybody on board, everybody 
ready to obey, and a Norwegian steamer came up and ran right into 
her and sunk her. 

Air. Hardy. What time of the year was it? 

Mr. Furuseth. About November. 

Mr. Chindblom. Well, it Avas while this bill was being considered 
for passage, Avas it? 

Mr. Furuseth. It was while this bill was under consideration, but 
this bill was considered for a long time. It Avas up in the House 
and up in the Senate and up in the House and up in the Senate 
and up in the House and up in the Senate. 

Mr. Chindblom. The crucial time was a feAv months prior to 
March, 1915, was it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The absolute date- 

Mr. Hardy. You can put that in the record. 

Mr. Edmonds. It Avas in cold weather, and a very fogy day. 

Mr. Hardy. Was it the cold water that killed those people? 

Mr. Furuseth. I have not got the date of the sinking of the Em¬ 
press of Ireland here—the date is not here. 

Mr. Hardy. Put it in your statement. 

Mr. Furuseth. Here is a fact about disasters at sea, dug up. 
Running from 1860 to 1914 the record is 31,000 lives lost at sea. 

Mr. Edmonds. Then that is the safest kind of travel. It beats the 
railroads. 

Mr Furuseth. Congressman, let me make a suggestion to you. 
If you Avill pass a laAv that no vessel shall be permitted to be insured 
for more than half of its sale value, and then will abolish or repeal 
the marine liabilitv laws of the United States, and put the same 
responsibility for the loss of life upon the shipowners that you have 
put upon the railroads, in the name of the seamen of the country, I 




422 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 

will agree to the striking out of every vestige of safety legislation 
for seamen. T know that under those circumstances I can agree that 
you can strike out all the laws regarding engineers, masters, and 
pilots, all the safety legislation, all the regulations that shipowners 
complain about, and leave it to the shipowners absolutely to use their , 
own judgment. 

But do not permit them to insure their vessels for any more than 
50 per cent of the sales value, as they do in Holland, and put them 
under the obligation for the loss of life the same way as the rail¬ 
roads are. and do not let them insure against the loss of life; do not 
let them take it and turn it over to the public through insurance. 
If you do that you may strike every bit of it, and I know that the 
seamen will agree, and we will agree on the part of the people, be¬ 
cause we know more about what is safe for the people who travel 
than anybody else does. We travel with them and we understand, 
because those who are able seamen know what is dangerous and 
what is not. 

There never was any necessity for any regulations at all until it 
got so that you could insure the vessel for her full value and more 
if you wanted to, and, secondly, until you adopted the limitation of 
liability and took the responsibility from the shipowner. Up until 
that time there was no such thing as regulations about safety, be¬ 
cause self-interest stood guard at safety. When you swept away self- 
interest, then you had to make legislation. That is all there is to 
that. 

Mr. Briggs. Are those figures with regard to the loss of life at sea 
between 1860 and 1914 complete? 

Mr. Furuseth. No. Here is how we went to work about it. 

Mr. Chindblom. They apply to disasters all over the world? 

Mr. Furtjseth. Yes; and in the American vessels there was more 
of it than in any others. 

Mr. Scott. Give us that. 

Mr. Furuseth. I can give you that by and by, but I can not give 
it to you now. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to ask you a question. I understand it, but 
I expect some of the members do not. What do you mean by limit 
of liability? 

Mr. Briggs. I want to ask further about that figure. Does that 
pretend to represent all the lives lost at sea during that period of 
time? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; let me explain it to you. We went to the 
bureaus in Washington. We were up against the same proposition 
then as we are now. The Congressmen said. “ Will you kindly tell 
us what is the total number of people drowned at sea? ” and so on, 
and we spent two months writing that article and put it in the rec-* 
ord, and it has stood the test ever since for the most critical men 
and everybody else. 

Now, let us come to this thing here: They said, “ How many people 
have been lost? Where have they been lost? How have they been 
lost? ” So we went to the bureaus here in Washington. Now, they 
are supposed to make reports to the Steamboat-Inspection Service, 
and they are supposed to keep records. 

Mr. Briggs. Were these American vessels only ? 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 423 


Mr. I uruseth. No; these are not American vessels only. 

Mr. Briggs. These are the figures for the whole world ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I just asked you whether they purported to be com- 
plete figures and whether they were all the people that had been 
drowned during that period at sea ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; they are people that we could get the abso¬ 
lute facts about. They do not show all the Americans or the figures 
for all the world, but it was the only thing we could get. We went to 
the bureaus here and got the facts we could, and then we went to- 

Mr. Briggs. I understand that. 

Mr. Hardy. Please explain what you mean by the limit of liability 
and its effect upon the vessel owners’ interest. 

Mr. Furuseth. Under the American law the shipowner is not 
liable to the traveler and the shipper beyond the freight money pend¬ 
ing and the proceeds from the sale of the wreck—that is all; the 
freight money pending and the proceeds from the sale of the wreck. 

Mr. Hardy. Suppose the vessel goes down ? 

Mr. Furuseth. There are no proceeds from the sale of the wreck, 
as in the case of the Titanic. That was decided in the Supreme Court. 
Instead of going over to England they came into an American port 
and took advantage of the law here, and the only thing that remained 
there was half a dozen boats that were picked up. 

Mr. Gahn. They settled, did they not? 

Mr. Furuseth. They never settled anything. They settled in the 
United States, because the Supreme Court said so, for the dead and 
the sufferers to the extent of about $90,000. 

Mr. Hardy. There is another question I want to ask you, and I 
think it is essential. If the law prescribed certain requirements and 
they comply with them, then they have no liability, but if they do 
not comply with the requirements they have liability under our law ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. So that when you relieve them of the requirements 
you thereby relieve them of all liability for losses ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolutely. That is correct. Now, there is another 
thing in this law- 

Mr. Hardy. Let me get that plain. So that if only 20 per cent of 
life-saving equipment is required on a vessel and 100 per cent goes 
down, the vessel has, if it has the 20 per cent equipment, complied 
with the law and is there free from liability? 

Mr. Furuseth. She is free from liability. 

Mr. Hardy. If the vessel had been required to have a larger equip¬ 
ment she would not be free ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No, sir. If she was required to have 20 per cent, 
and she had 20 per cent boats and 30 per cent rafts and 100 per cent 
life preservers, having them and every man, as provided by law 
here, to handle them, then they are absolutely free from any liability. 

Mr. Chindblom. The question of negligence does not enter into it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No, sir; negligence is not upon the owner. The 
owner has shed that responsibility and put it on the crew. Legisla¬ 
tion took that responsibility off his shoulders and put it upon the 
licensed officer. 


424 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Edmonds. Well, if the disaster is due to the fault of the cap¬ 
tain, the boat is still liable to those people who are drowned, is it 
not ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No, sir; nothing of the kind. 

Mr. Edmonds. Yes; it is. The Harter Act says that. 

Mr. Furuseth. Excuse me. The Harter Act passed, and the 
Slocum disaster took place, and I have yet to find one single person 
who collected anything. 

Mr. Edmonds. It was not found that it was due to the fault of the 
officers on board. 

Mr. Furuseth. It was not? The captain of the Slocum was sent 
to prison. 

Mr. Edmonds. Was not the value of the boat liable? 

Mr. Furuseth. Not at all; not a cent. You see, in that case they 
were trying by law to take the insurance money—to seize upon the 
insurance money. 

Mr. Edmonds. I am not talking about the owner of the boat: I am 
talking about the boat itself. 

Mr. Furuseth. The boat itself was gone; it was burned. 

Mr. Edmonds. And it was held that the insurance was liable ? 

Mr. Furuseth. They could not take the insurance money. 

Mr. Edmonds. So, if they could have taken the insurance money, 
that would have gone to the people? 

Mr. Furuseth. If it could have been done; but they could not do 
it under the law and they can not do it under the law now. Let me 
explain this to you: The shipping companies incorporate each par¬ 
ticular vessel as a separate corporation, and then they make the 
contracts with this dummy corporation over to a holding company— 
a managing company—and when the boat is burned or sunk the cor¬ 
poration has no assets, and nothing can be collected from that at all 
from anybody. 

Mr. Edmonds. You can not collect the insurance that there is on 
the ship? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; because if you could they would not insure; 
there would be no inducement for a man to insure his vessel if you 
could do that. If you could seize the insurance, there would be no 
inducement for a man to insure his vessel. 

Mr. Edmonds. You mean that the boat company owed the insur¬ 
ance to the ship subsidiary company—the holding company—and 
they took the insurance ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I mean this, that the boat really belonged to the 
same company. Take the Knickerbocker Steamboat Co. They have 
several boats, but each boat is incorporated as a separate corporation, 
and the contract is made by the Knickerbocker Steamboat Co. to 
operate the boat under certain laws and regulations, and certain 
money has to be paid by the Knickerbocker Steamship Co. to the 
Slocum Co. as hire for the boat as pay for the use of the boat, so 
much hire per month, per day, or whatever it may be. Now, then, 
when the Slocum sinks the Slocum Co. sinks, because it has got noth¬ 
ing, there are no assets that can be reached anywhere. 

Mr. Edmonds. How about if the Slocum Co. had insurance ? 

Mr. Furuseth. If they had insurance you can not reach the insur¬ 
ance, because if you do make arrangements so that you can reach the 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 425 

insurance, then the people will not insure, because what is the use of 
insurance if somebody can go and take the insurance money from 
them ? 

Mr. Edmonds. Suppose the company insures the boats and gets the 
insurance ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The vessel gets it in the same way. 

Mr. Edmonds. The Knickerbocker Co.? 

Mr. Furuseth. The Knickerbocker Co. will get it; they take the 
insurance, of course. 

Mr. Scott. Is that the system in vogue on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. Certainly! 

Mr. Hardy. Did anybody get anything out of the Slocum? 

Mr. Furuseth. Nobody." 

Mr. Scott. How many subsidiary companies are there under the 
D. & C. Line? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know, sir. 

Mr. Scott. They have eight ships operating. Do you mean to tell 
this committee they have eight subsidiary companies ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know. I presume, for one thing, that 
they are business men of the same acumen and the same sharpness as 
others and that they will take advantage of the laws that operate in 
their favor. 

Now, if you will put this thing over for a month, these hearings 
over for a month, I will get you the absolute history of these com¬ 
panies from the secretaries of the different States where they are in¬ 
corporated, what they have been earning, how much they have got in 
improvements, how much they paid in dividends, and all that, where 
they are incorporated. That can be obtained and you can get it 
instead of depending upon this loose talk. 

Mr. Scott. The Interstate Commerce Commission has it? 

Mr. Furuseth. The Interstate Commerce Commission has not got 
it, I do not think—they may have it—I do not know whether they 
have it or not; but I know somebody has absolutely got it, and they 
are required, under the incorporation laws to give a yearly report of 
their investment, their earnings, their dividends, whether it be a stock 
dividend or money dividend, and then their surplus, and how much 
they put into improvements and new material, new vessels, etc., and 
where it all comes from. There is no difficulty in getting that, but 
I did not know anything about this thing. I had not any idea. We 
got a description about four big steamship companies in New York, 
lout I did not have any idea it was coming here now, and, of course, 
we are not prepared for that kind of thing. And it is a very serious 
thing too, gentlemen, to submit to us, who do not know and are not 
supposed to know anything else except a sailor’s duty or a fireman’s 
c ] u ty—it is not necessary that a man shall be able to read and write 
in order to be a sailor or fireman, and you are asking us questionsyn 
some instances here that could only be"properly asked of a financier 
or a lawyer. 

Mr. Mills. But you brought up this question yourself. You un¬ 
dertook to tell the "committee what the law was with relation to the 
limit of liability. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; I did that, because that I know. Then I was 
asked, “ Does that applv to the Lakes? ” I said, “ Yes; the law ap- 


426 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

plies; certainly it does.” Now, do the Lake shipowners take ad¬ 
vantage of it? I said I did not know. I said I presumed they are 
business men of the same acumen and looked after their own inter¬ 
ests the same as any other men do. I do not know, and I can not tell, 
but if you will give me a month to find it out I will find it out; I will 
find out whether they have subsidiary companies or not. There is 
no difficulty in finding it out. 

Mr. Hardy. I understand you know that they do it in other places. 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolutely; on the Atlantic and on the Pacific the 
shipowner just simply does that all the time. I know shipping com¬ 
panies that have got 30 vessels made upon 30 separate corporations, 
and that the vessels belong to the corporations. They are simply 
dummy corporations, that is all; but you can not prove that in a year. 

Mr. Jefferis. Is there any law with regard to this insurance busi¬ 
ness that you speak about ? 

Mr. Furuseth. None at all. The law about insurance is this, sir. 
I will take the C. <& D. I do not own a nail in the 0. <& D. She is 
running from Buffalo to Cleveland, is she not? 

Mr. O’Brien. The C. <& B. does. 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, we can take any other ship in the Great 
Lakes; I do not care where she is. We can go and take insurance on 
that vessel. Insurance is on a bet. I will bet against the insurance 
company that the vessel will sink. 

Mr. Chindblom. Do you mean to say that you must not have an 
insurable interest? 

Mr. Furuseth. I mean that under maritime law you do not have 
to have an insurable interest at all. 

Mr. Chindblom. I know that you can insure anything in Lloyd’s. 

Mr. Furuseth. I say that was the martime law up to a year ago. 
I do not know what it is now. You have not got to have any insur¬ 
able interest in a ship. You can go and insure it yourself. 

Mr. Hardy. So the holding conqmny got the insurance money 
upon the ship that belonged to this separate corporation ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. I can very well see how a holding company 
would have an insurable interest to guarantee its earnings. 

Mr. Briggs. I assume your reference to the law just now, Mr. 
Jefferis, was whether there was anything on the Federal statute 
books. 

Mr. Jefferis. What I was trying to get at was whether this 
liabilitv limitation and insurance limitation in practice amounted 
to the shipowner turning over all of his responsibility to somebody 
else, to the insurance company, or to the law, so to speak, so that 
the only safety the public had was really the law requiring the 
number of men and the kind of men to operate the safety appliances. 

Mr. F uruseth. That is all the safety the public has. 

Mr. Mills. How about the value of the vessel ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I say the value of the vessel means nothing to the 
traveling public. 

Mr. Mills. Come, now, it does mean a great deal, short of total 
loss. If a person is traveling on a vessel and he is injured through 
the negligent handling of the vessel, he collects. It is only in case 
of total loss that he does not collect. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 427 


Mr. Furuseth. If a passenger on board of a vessel is hurt through 
the bursting of a steam pipe or through the breaking of a handrail 
or through the breaking down of something else—if he is hurt in 
that way, he has got a right to recover damages. 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. But that is not the case of the loss of the ship: 
that is not the case of the sinking or burning of the ship. 

Mr. Mills. We are getting into all kinds of very intricate ques¬ 
tions here, which could all be solved by saying that the liability of 
the owner is limited to the value of the ship ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I said that at the beginning. 

Mr. Mills. Then that covers the whole case, does it not ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; that is not true. 

Mr. Mills. If she is not a total loss, the shippers and passengers 
recover the value of the ship. 

Mr. Furuseth. Even there that is not true. The Congressman is 
misinformed. 

Mr. Mills. I doubt it. 

Mr. Furuseth. Here is the law. Wait until I get “ liability.” 

Mr. Edmonds. On page 116, Mr. Furuseth. You have the Harter 
Act there. 

Mr. Furuseth. That only repeals some parts of it. Now, let us 
see what the Harter Act says. 

Mr. Jefferis. It is section 3, at the bottom of page 116,1 think. 

Mr. Furuseth. I will get to section 4283. On page 116 of the 
navigation laws—at least the issue that I have here—under the head¬ 
ing of “ Liability of owners, masters, and shippers,” section 4283 of 
the Revised Statutes, reads: 

The liability of the owner of any vessel for any embezzlement, loss, or de¬ 
struction by any person of any property, goods, or merchandise shipped or put 
on board of such vessel, or for any loss, damage, or injury by collision, or for 
any act, matter, or thing lost, damage, or forfeiture done, occasipned, or 
incurred without the privity or knowledge of such owner or owners shall in 
no case exceed the amount of the value of the interest of such owner in such 
vessel and her freight money then pending. 

That is the first proposition. 

Mr. Edmonds. Now read section 3 of the Harter Act, right over 
there on the next page. 

Mr. Furuseth. Section 3 of the Harter Act reads as follows: 

If the owner of any vessel transporting merchandise or property to or from 
any port in the United States of America shall exercise due diligence to make 
the said vessel in all respects seaworthy and properly manned, equipped, and 
supplied, neither the vessel or owners, agent, or charterers shall become or be 
held responsible for damage or loss resulting from faults or errors in naviga¬ 
tion or in the management of said vessel, nor shall the vessel or her owners, 
charterers, agents, or master be held liable for loss arising from danger on the 
sea or other navigable waters, acts of God or the public enemy, or inherent de¬ 
fect, quality or device, of the thing carried, or from insufficiency of damage on 
sea, under legal protest, or from loss resulting from any act or omission of the 
shipper or owner of the goods, his agent or representative, or from saving or 
attempting to save lives or property at sea, or from any deficiency in rendering 
such service. 

Mr. Mills. Well? 

Mr. Furuseth. There you have got it. 

Mr. Hardy. Does that mean that if the vessel is equipped in com¬ 
pliance with the requirements of the law. then the vessel is not re¬ 
sponsible for any loss or damage? 


428 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. Exactly. 

Mr. Mills. Does it? She is still responsible for negligence, is 
she not? 

Mr. Furttseth. No. He is responsible for his own negligence, 
but if he has equipped her and manned her in accordance with the 
law made by Congress, or under the regulations made by the in¬ 
spectors, under the power conferred upon them by Congress, having 
done all that the regulations or law requires, he has no responsibility 
left except this: That if there is an inherent defect in the hull, then 
the Supreme Court the other day said that he still has got liability, 
whether he knows it or not, if there is an inherent defect in the hull, 
the Supreme Court said he is still liable. 

Mr. Mills. You claim he is not liable for the negligence of the 
officers ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Fie is not liable for that, because the law specifi¬ 
cally says that the passenger or shipper may sue the officers of the 
vessel for any neglect on their part, not the owner. Gentlemen, the 
shipowner has shed every responsibility to the traveling public, 
every responsibility to the shipper, every responsibility to anyone 
of that kind. He was once responsible for all these things. The law 
says that he shall be responsible to the extent of the part he owns 
in the ship, but I tell you that by corporation organization they have 
organized themselves clean from all that responsibility^, so that they 
have absolutely no responsibility. And here is where you have got 
it: Get as many people as you can on board the ship, get as little 
crew as 3-011 possibly can, and as cheap as you possibly can. Send 
her out on the sea or on the Lakes, and if she gets in, that is because 
God is good. If she does not get in she does not allow us anything. 

(Whereupon the committee adjourned until Saturday, May 7, 
1921, at 10 o’clock a. m.) 


Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Saturday , May 7, 1921. 

The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m. Hon. William S. Greene 
(chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Furuseth. 

STATEMENT OF ME. ANDREW FURUSETH—Resumed. 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, Mr. Chairman, one of the very important 
things in this bill is the question of the able seamen, and I want to 
state I have a book here, written by Frank T. Bullen, of England, 
who used to Avrite in the interests of the Shipping Federation of 
England. It is entitled “The Men of the Merchant Service.” I 
never knew him, never heard anything about him, until I got hold 
of the book. Here is what he says about the able seaman: 

An able seaman, properly so-called, is a skilled mechanic of great ability. 
On sailing vessels his place, in calm or storm, never can be adequately filled 
by the unskilled, however numerous, nor on steamships in emergencies. 

In the last hearing, when this bill was passed, there was put into 
this record what the rest of the nations do with reference to able 
seamen. Among the things we put in were the laws of New Zealand,, 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 429 


Australia, England, and Germany. Germany and England were, 
of course, at that time the biggest seafaring nations. Now, Germany 
has a law under which the employers of labor pay a certain amount 
for taking care of the injured: the country, that is, the nation, pays a 
certain amount, and the men themselves pay a certain amount; but 
the largest amount comes out of the shipowner, in case of ships, or out 
of the factory owner in case of a factory. They have a right under 
this law to make regulations as to how men shall act, what skill they 
shall have, etc. And the German shipowners, of their own volition, 
looking after their own interests, provided that an able seaman shall 
be a man with four years’ experience. They divide them up into able 
seamen; second-class able seamen; that is, seamen under the regular 
age; ordinary seamen, of a less wage; young men who have a little 
experience and little less wage, and the boy the least. So that it goes 
from boy to young men, then to ordinary seamen, who is a seaman at 
less pay, and then the full able seaman. That is the way they divide 
them in Japan and in Germany. Now, then, the shipowners, acting 
for themselves, looking after their own interests, adopted this thing, 
which it would take some little time to read so I simply explain it, to 
the extent that I say they themselves provided and they themselves 
enforce provisions of that much experience. 

Mr. Mills. What is that pamphlet ? 

Mr. Furuseth. This pamphlet is “ Involuntary servitude imposed 
upon seamen; synopsis of hearings before Committee of Commerce, 
of the United States Senate, Sixty-second Congress, third session.” 
The hearings themselves fill a book about like this [indicating]. Now, 
in order that they w T ould get the meat of this thing the shipowners 
made a synopsis and we were asked to make a synopsis—the seamen. 
We went through that thing and picked it out and made a synopsis, 
and then submitted it to Senator Nelson, Senator Burton, and so on. 
They went over it and, after going over it and examining it, they 
published it in the United States Printing Office, at the expense of 
the Government. 

Mr. Hardy. Is it a numbered Senate document? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; it is just what I said; it has not a document 
number. It is a synopsis of the hearings, and it contains the strongest 
things that were said by the shipowners and the strongest things that 
were said by the seamen, on both sides, and put in juxtaposition to each 
other, So that you read the one and then you read the other, and also 
a comparison of the American law with the laws of foreign Govern¬ 
ments. And, by the way, I want to call your attention generally that 
there is a pamphlet issued by the Government of the United States, 
Special Series No. 114, issued by the Bureau of Foreign Trade of the 
Department of Commerce, in which the laws of five nations are com¬ 
pared. It was done officially; we did not know anything about the 
book until it was out. 

Mr. Bankhead. Of what five nations? 

Mr. Furuseth. Japan, United Slates, Norway, Germany, and 
England. 

Mr. Mills. Is that by the Department of Commerce? 

Mr. Furuseth. Department of Commerce; Special Series, No. 
114. And it compares the laws of the United States with other 
laws. I wanted to call your attention to the importance of the 
able seamen, that is all. 


430 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 


Now, I come to the question of what is the situation with refer¬ 
ence to the seamen. Is the seaman’s work very dangerous work— 
is there any danger at sea, or is there not? And in order to give you 
that information I will give to you the best that has been pub¬ 
lished in the world on that question. It is published by a priest 
or minister in England, called Father Hopkins. It is in a book 
called the Seamen’s Friendly Society of St. Paul and Our British 
Mercantile Marine. Noav, gentlemen, here is a black streak about 
3 inches long. That represents the seamen that die in the service. 
The next black streak represents the minors; the next represents 
the factory operatives; and the fourth represents the railroad men. 

Mr. Bankhead. During how long a period, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. In a year. It is a comparison between the dan¬ 
gers of going to sea and these other occupations. 

Mr. Hardy. It is a percentage comparison? 

Mr. Furuseth. This is all percentages. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean those different black columns to which 
you refer, of the different heights, show the gradations, emphasiz¬ 
ing the loss of life by the seamen. 

Mr. Furuseth. Exactly. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is in Great Britain? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is in Great Britain. 

Mr. Briggs. What are the percentages? Have you the figures 
there? Just put them in the record. 

Mr. Furuseth. I will tell you what I might do; I might take a 
certain amount of this and put it in the record. 

Mr. Briggs. How much of that do you want to put in the record? 

Mr. Furuseth. I would say about two pages. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that all right, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. Chindblom. To what does it relate—losses on the ocean? 

Mr. Furuseth. Losses on the sea and ocean in England and Great 
Britain—losses at sea in Great Britain. 

Mr. Chindblom. What do you think that proves in regard to 
losses on the Great Lakes ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, we have no such inland seas in Great 
Britain as the Lakes. There is only, in all Europe, a single lake 
which has any size compared to the Lakes here in America, and that 
is Lake Onega in Russia. 

Mr. Chindblom. That being so, does it prove anything regarding 
conditions on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. It proves—first and foremost, we contend that 
the Lakes are dangerous, and we do not ask you to argue that 
question with us, or the shipowners. We say go to the Weather 
Bureau and get the record, go to the Government and get the records 
of losses they maintain either in the Weather Bureau or in one of 
the departments. We tried to get them but we could not get them 
because they are too mixed. We have a blessed condition here in 
which four or five departments duplicate each other. We are try¬ 
ing to get away from that now. At any rate, I am presenting this 
and trying to show you the importance of the able seamen. 

The Chairman. Everybody knows that. 

Mr. Furuseth. All right. 

Mr. Chindblom. I want to say this: I want you to get everything 
in the record you think it necessary to make your case, and if you 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 431 

think this is necessary to go in the record to make your case, I have 
no objection. But let us not make the record so long and cover so 
many subjects that it will discourage a close examination of the 
real issue. 

Mr. Scott. Is this the part you wish to go in: The total number 
of deaths of seamen reported for the year 1912-13 works out at 
1 death in every 121 seamen employed. Deaths by injury (accident 
or otherwise), totaled 1,069, or 1 in 225. Deaths from diseases, 920, 
or 1 in every 261. Is that what you wanted? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. Those are the things just as you have got it 
there. Now, then, I want to call your attention to the question of 
the actual interest that the shipowners, the traveling public, and the 
seamen have in safety and where we are on that question. And I am 
not now talking for myself; I mean to say, I am not going to quote 
anything I have said. 

The C hairman. Does this relate to the ocean at large? 

Mr. Furuseth. It relates to everything, because the laws of the 
United States about loss and responsibility are the same on the Great 
Lakes as on the ocean. 

The Chairman. All right. Go ahead and get to your meat as 
soon as you can. 

Mr. Furuseth. This is the meat now I am giving. Tips is the 
statement made by Joseph Chamberlain, president of the British 
board of trade in the struggle to improve the conditions of safety of 
British ships, quoting again from the book by this same man, Rev. 
Charles P. Hopkins. And here is what he says: 

Bear in mind, when a ship is lost the shipowner may make a profit, the owner 
may get more than the value of his ship; the merchant may lose nothing, hut 
may, and very often does, get more than the value of the cargo back. In the 
same way the underwriter averages his losses, and on the whole makes a profit 
on the insurance of the ship out of his premium. 

That is from a statement made by Joseph Chamberlain. 

Now, 1 am coming to the actual conditions of safety on the Lakes. 
Comparing the law as it passed with the law as it was before—I read 
some of this yesterday. 

The Chairman. Do not repeat it to-day, then. 

Mr. Furuseth. Oh, no; I am trying not to repeat. 

On the ocean, going more than 20 miles from shore, 75 per cent of lifeboats, 
25 per cent of rafts, for the maximum number of persons on board. 

That is marked “ 1.” That corresponds exactly to what the law 
was on the other side, as follows: On the ocean, 50 per cent of boats 
and 50 per cent of rafts to accommodate all persons on board—a 
difference of 25 per cent of boats. 

2. On ocean vessels going less than 20 miles from shore, from September 15 
to May 15, 25 per cent of lifeboats and 25 per cent of rafts for all persons on 
board. From May 15 to September 15, 35 per cent of boats, 35 per cent of rafts, 
and 30 per cent without either for the maximum number of persons on board. 

The law was this: 

On the ocean within 20 miles of shore, from May 15 to September 15, 20 per 
cent of lifeboats, 40 per cent of rafts, and 40 per cent of neither. 

In other words, as I put it yesterday, there was an arrangement 
under which 20 per cent had some chance to be saved in a boat, 40 
per cent had some little chance to be saved on a raft (and I shall 


432 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 11 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

explain the raft to you in a minute), and 40 per cent were authorized 
to be drowned. There is nothing remains to be said. 

3. Vessels on the Lakes, from September 15 to May 15, 75 per cent lifeboats 
and 25 per cent of rafts for all persons on board. 

Mr. Hardy. That is the seaman’s law ? 

Mr. Furuseth. This is the seaman’s law. From May 15 to Sep¬ 
tember 15, 20 per cent of lifeboats, 30 per cent of life rafts, and 50 
per cent of neither—that is, neither rafts nor boats. In other words, 
you have here boats to save 20 per cent of the people on board, rafts 
to save 30 per cent of the people on board, and nothing to save the rest. 

Now, then, what was the law before? On the Lakes, bays, and 
sounds from October 15 to May 15, 25 per cent of boats and 75 per 
cent of rafts for the number of persons on board. Now, from May 
15 to October 15, 7^ per cent of boats, 224 per cent of rafts, and 70 
per cent of neither. In other words, 70 per cent were authorized 
to be drowned. 

4. On the Lakes, bays, and sounds, in waters within 3 miles of shore or 
over waters not deep enough to submerge the entire vessel, the number of 
boats and rafts is left to the discretion of the Inspection Service. That is 
the seaman’s act. 

Let us see what it was before. From May 15 to October 15, within 
3 miles of shore or over waters whose depth is not sufficient to entirely 
submerge the vessel, 3^ per cent of boats, 6f per cent of rafts, and 
90 per cent of nothing. 

5. From May 15 to October 15, if equipped with wireless, navigating in day¬ 
light only and not more than 10 miles from shore, 3f per cent of boats, 111 
per cent of rafts, and 85 per cent of neither. In other words, with no liability 
to the traveler, under any law, exempted specifically by law from any liability, 
if they carry out the inspection rules or the law—if they follow them and 
carry them out; and it is almost impossible to prove that they did not after¬ 
wards because the vessel is gone, the testimony is gone. If they can prove it or, 
in other words, if nobody else can prove that they did not, the presumption is 
that they did have these things and there is a limitation of liability and there 
is nothing that can be collected. Now, mind you, there is 3f per cent of boats 
,and 111 per cent of rafts, making 10 per cent of the total. 

Mr. Hardy. No. 

Mr. Furuseth. Fifteen per cent, it amounts to. Now, the others 
have no chance; they have to take their chances. And of course people 
did not know these things until it was exposed in these hearings, and 
then they read the newspapers about it; then the Eastland capsized, 
and they read the newspapers about that. And the shipowners are 
wondering why their passenger traffic has fallen off. 

Now, then, this bill proposes to cut in two what is provided in the 
seamen’s act, and then it proposes to take away the only man who 
has any skill at all to handle boats and rafts and things of that 
description. I do not say that they have the skill. They have not 
got the skill that they should have, but we have done everything we 
could to raise it again. But when you are going in one direction for 
60 years to destroy skill, you can not lift that body up in a year or 
two, particularly if the mud sailors have got to do it alone. 

Next is the question “ Is it necessary to have any experience.” The 
Member from New York (Mr. Mills)*asked the question if a man can 
rig a jury rudder, if a man can steer in all kinds of weather, if he 
can handle tackles that lift heavy weights, if lie can lower with 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 433 

tackles heavy weights—-if he has experience to do that kind of thing 
and an actual examination shows it can be done, would you accept it 
without any time of service. I say unhesitatingly yes; because no 
man living could learn those things except through experience. One 
of the brightest intellects—Dana—in his time wrote a book, “ Two 
Years Before the Mast.” And he tells you in that book that after two 
years he is not an able seaman; he does not consider himself such. 

Of course, if you had to have able seamen on board of steamers at 
all times, as you had to have on board of sailing vessels, why your 
vessels would be lying at the docks. But you have not got to have it 
at all times, and God is good; he does not send disaster every day. 

The question was asked yesterday as to the date when the Empress 
of I reland went down in the St. Lawrence. It was May 29,1914. The 
Empress of Ireland and the Norwegian collier Storstad had a col¬ 
lision. A gale started to come up and there was a heavy squall and 
the Storstad rammed the Empress of Ireland. Help was within two 
hours and came within two hours. She was less than 3 miles from 
shore—not over 2, so far as I can. find out, but in order to be absolutely 
sure, I say not more than 3. And yet they picked up at the time 
1,027 dead with life belts on them—in the month of May. 

Mr. Bankhead. What year was that, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. 1914. 

Mr. Gahn. Was that on the Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. It was in the St. Lawrence River, which is not out 
on the Lakes by a long ways. 

With reference to the number of vessels lost on the Lakes, I can 
not go into that thing because I do not know absolutely, and it is 
very difficult to find out, but the Government can furnish it to you if 
you insist upon. it. You can get it either from the Weather Bureau 
or from the Life-Saving Service—that is, from the Coast Guard; 
and there are certain people that keep that record—the Weather 
Bureau, for their own selfish interest, to show the usefulness of the 
service, and the Life-Saving Service, to show that they are useful. 
And then the law provides definitely that disasters shall be reported 
to the Steamboat-Inspection Service, on the one hand, and to the 
collectors of customs, on the other, and the Department of Commerce 
is in some way to fix it up. So that you can get that. 

One thing more. There has been a question raised here, and a 
very serious one, as to the number of vessels that have changed from 
the* American flag to the Canadian flag in the last four years, and 
there has been discussion backforwards and forwards that has taken 
up time. And I want to say to you that you can get that very shortly, 
because in a law passed by*Congress no vessel can be passed from the 
American to any other flag except by permission of the United States 
Shipping Board. So, if you will send a request to the Shipping 
Board for any transfers of that kind that have taken place on the 
Lakes and want to know what kind of vessel it is, what their em¬ 
ployments were, their age, and everything about them, the United 
States Shipping Board will furnish you with that, because they 
must have the record of it if they have obeyed the law, and I pre¬ 
sume they have. 

Now, on the question of steering, obtaining men for steering. I 
came from the shore; I had never been on salt water and had never 

48420—21-28 


434 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


been on any large amount of fresh water larger than you could shoot 
an ordinary gun across, a rifle. But I could pull a pair of oars in a 
skiff when I went to sea. On the fifth day I was at sea I was at the 
wheel, steering by myself. I was at the wheel standing alongside of 
a man before that, who was showing me how, but on the fifth day I 
steered by myself while the wheelsman went somewheres and the 
officers of the vessel were down getting their dinner. Steering in 
ordinary, nice weather is a granny’s work. My sister can learn to do 
that in short order in fine weather. But I have been on board of a 
vessel with 16 men before the mast, where there were only three of 
us who could steer in bad weather, and I was 11 hours at that wheel, 
steering a vessel in a gale of wind, when I had the life of every man 
in the pit of my hand. A little bit of a mistake would have thrown 
the vessel in the trough of the sea, and she would have gone down 
and never been heard of. I was only one of three that could steer 
her under those conditions. And when I was relieved I dropped like 
a log. The captain picked me up and hollered for a glass of whisky 
and poured the whisky down between my teeth, and I went forward. 
We had been working about 36 hours trying to save the ship, and I 
had been 11 hours at the wheel. When I was at the wheel I looked 
back over my shoulder, and the captain must have noticed I was 
young, and the captain said, “Don’t look back,” because the seas 
were coming, and, of course, it was a question of my losing my nerve. 

If I did, we were gone. I smiled at him and said, “No danger, 
Captain; I won’t lose my nerve.” And there I stood constantly for 
11 hours this way at that wheel, this way [illustrating], playing with 
her, feeling that I had all the lives of those people in my hands, and 
feeling so proud of it that in all my life I have never spent another 
minute with the pride and selfconsciousness I then knew. I learned 
in those 11 hours why the seaman in olden times was entitled to the 
golden spurs and was placed in the highest regard of all working 
people. So much for that. 

Examinations I have dealt with, except the question was asked, 
What about doctors, dentists, lawyers, engineers, and so on—are they 
not compelled to go to school and then to serve a certain time at 
their regular work they are going to do in the world, and then when 
they have done that they are permitted to come and take an examina¬ 
tion? Why, certainly; that is the law of every civilized country. 
Now, then, let us take the officers of the ship. Under their rules no 
man is permitted to take an examination as second or third mate 
until he has been three years at sea, on deck, before he can come up 
for examination at all. They would not consider him; he has to fur¬ 
nish the proofs, absolute and unquestioned proofs, that he has served 
36 months at sea before he can be examined. Of course, during the 
war all that was dropped out a little, but now it is coming back. En¬ 
gineers may be for years in the machine shop, but they are not per¬ 
mitted to take an examination as marine engineers. They may be 
machinists; they may know how to build engines and how to set the 
engine up, but they are not permitted to take an examination as 
marine engineers in less than, I think, 12 months, if they have that 
much skill before, and about three years otherwise. So that every 
nation that has everything to do with maritime business, every nation 
that wants to have any share in the maritime commerce of the world 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 435 


or wants to have any sea power with which to protect its coasts neces¬ 
sarily must have skilled men, no matter what the shipowners may 
sav. If the United States does not want it, we can not help it. 

There are just a few words here that I want to put in that I think 
are of very considerable importance. As I said yesterday, I have 
spent 35 years burning the midnight oil to find out some of these 
things. I have had to do it, because I wanted to find out why it was 
that the seaman had become the absolute scum of human society. I 
had to study, and I found this, as the result of history, and I have put 
it to dozens and dozens of men, hundreds of them, scholars and his¬ 
torians, and here is what it says, and they all agree that it is abso¬ 
lutely the law of history: 

Sea power is in the seaman. Vessels are seamen’s tools. The tools ulti¬ 
mately belong to the nations or aces that know how to use them. 

It is as absolute as the law of gravitation. Sea power has passed 
from race to race and country to country in all historical periods, and 
upon those laws absolutely. 

Something about the raft. The shipowner says, “ Give us small 
rafts so that the people can throw them overboard themselves.” 
What is a raft for? How is it made? Two or three tubes, with a 
network of wood between them. The tubes are the things that keep 
it from sinking. Around the raft are ropes. It is not intended that 
a man should lav on the raft or sit on the raft. He can not do that. 
It is impossible in heavy weather. It can not be did. So the ropes 
are around there for the purpose of hanging onto the ropes, and then 
the raft is such that it keeps you up. 

Now, then, when you get a raft overboard, people have got to 
jump over to get on it or get to it, because there is a gale blowing. I 
am not talking now about perfectly smooth water. If the water is 
smooth, it would not make much difference if a man or a full-grown 
woman, reasonably healthy, is in the water for a little while. That 
will not make such a terrible difference, but you have got children to 
deal with, too. Now, then, when there is a gale on—and it does not 
need to be much, 40 or 50 miles—it kicks up the sea, and that turns 
the raft over like that. The sea takes hold of the raft and swings it 
over, and you go off, and you get underneath. Now, you hold onto 
these ropes, and the larger the raft is the less chance there is of the 
raft turning over, and the more chance you have got of somebody 
hanging on and somebody staying on. The shipowner comes here 
and tells you that rafts are better life-saving appliances than boats. 
The shipowners in Europe, at the conference on safety of life at sea, 
told us that, and they adopted a certain amount of rafts, in spite of 
the fact that all the seamen stood for boats for everybody, and the 
British House of Commons at that time had urged that there should 
be boats for everybody on board. That terrible man. the Emperor of 
Germany, did the same thing in Germany, as the result of the Titanic 
disaster,' and so did every nation do it. 

Now, they say rafts are just as good and better—75 per cent of 
boats and 25 per cent rafts. And after they had determined this 
thing I said, “Then, gentlemen, of course, since the raft is a better 
life-saving appliance and a safer thing, of course you will not have 
any objection to the crew doing exactly what they did on the Can- 


436 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

casian and what everybody in the Nordic race is supposed to do— 
4 women and children first.’ You will have no objection, then, to 
the women and children being put on the rafts, and the sailors, 
firemen, and males in the forward end of the ship taking the boats.” 
I said, “ You say it is better and safer, and the rule with us is not 
like it is with the Chinese. The rule coming from the northland 
somewhere in the ancient times is £ women and children first.' That 
is where England got it. That is the rule of the sea—on lake and 
ocean—and the highest duty of the seaman. Under your testimony, 
under your decision we are not only perfectly justified, but we are 
in duty bound to take the boats and give the rafts to the kids and 
the women.” Well, I was only a sailor, you know, and it did not 
make much difference, so they put on 25 per cent of rafts and 75 per 
cent boats. But I read how many boats you have got here and how 
many rafts. Now, they say that a raft shall be of a certain size? 
Why? Because the shipowners come and say, “ Cut it down again so 
small that somebody can pick it up and throw it overboard.” 

I wish I had been on board a vessel with one of you gentlemen, and 
you had had your children with you, under the experiences such as I 
have gone through in my time. Would you stand there and throw 
your child down on that raft? Of course. I can conceive of the pos¬ 
sibility of a man doing that with his wife. But it is the same rule in 
Europe as here; and again I want to say that it is the International 
Shipping Federation (Ltd.), with headquarters in London, that is 
telling the English shipowners what to do, the Norwegian ship¬ 
owners what to do, and the American shipowners what to do. and 
the shipowners come to you—the legislators and the Government— 
and they put their smoke screen between themselves, and you gentle¬ 
men get it. Here is the terrible trouble: England thinks that she 
might have to retain her supremacy on the seas by using the citizens 
of the foreign nations to destroy the sea power of those particular 
nations. 

Now. a word with regard to the union and I shall be through: The 
Seamen’s Union of America it was called until we started- 

Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Furuseth. if you will pardon me, with the 
permission of the chairman, before you get off the subject of the 
likelihood of accidents, there has not been much discussion here in 
regard to the likelihood of danger from collision and from fire. 
The discussion has been devoted mostly to the question of the weather 
on the Great Lakes. Do not those elements enter into it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Thank you very much, because that gives me an¬ 
other opportunity. I would have dropped it. if you had not re¬ 
minded me. I did not think of it. While this seamen’s act was 
under discussion in the United States Senate there came over to my 
office in the morning the story that shook the whole world. A ship 
was on fire in the middle Atlantic in a gale of wind. There was not 
a chance to get a vessel called in by wireless. They hovered around 
her. They tried to launch her boats, and the English ship that 
launched her boats had to sail around and pick up the boat because 
they could not do anything with her. 

Mr. Bankhead. What boat was that ? 

Mr. Furuseth. That was the Volturna. She was afire, and they 
could not get the people off. At last a Bussian ship came along. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 437 

She lowered her boats, and she had such excellent seamen and boat¬ 
men that they got to the vessel first. They saved some of the people 
in that way before the gale was over, and then they saved some of 
them as the gale went down, before the vessel went down itself— 
burned. I not only know that from the descriptions, but the chief 
engineer on that vessel is the son-in-law of Mr. Wilson, the Presi¬ 
dent of the British Seamen’s Union, and when I met him in Wilson’s, 
home we talked about the Volturna, and he told me all about it, and 
the conditions were worse than had ever been published. 

Mr. Hardy. What case was that where we gave a medal to the 
officers of a foreign ship for saving lives in some disaster? Do yon 
remember ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not remember that instance. I think the 
officers of the Kroonlcmd took part in that. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes; the officers of the Kroonlcmd were mixed up in 
that and they got the medal. It was presented by Congress to the 
officers of the Kroonlcmd on account of the ass : stance they had given 
to the sinking vessel, and their skill in saving lives. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; the Kroonland did good work. 

Here on the Potomac, while this bill was under discussion, two 
vessels took fire, down on the river here, and it was all they could 
do to manage to get the people off and get them on the beach. That 
is to say, they ran the vessel on the beach, of course. You know the 
story in the poem that he held her nose to the beach until every 
galoot was ashore. That is the case on a river. We are not asking 
for any lifesaving appliances or anything else for the river, because 
there is usually an opportunity to jam the nose of the ship or vessel 
into the bank. Somebody has got the guts to stay at the engine and 
stay at the wheel, and they stay there and the people are saved if 
they can be saved at all, and it is much easier to save them in the 
river. But it is an altogether different proposition to jam a vessel 
on the east shore of the lake, where you have got a 10, 15, 20, 100, 
or 150 sweep of water on the sea coming across. There is no chance 
of living in the surf on that beach. So that being close to shore is 
a very great disadvantage under certain conditions. 

The secretary of the Shipowners’ Association of New York, Mr. 
Britten, who stood at the end of the table in the Senate Office Build¬ 
ing, said, “For more than 20 years we have run these vessels at 
railroad speed, that is from railroad terminal to railroad terminal* 
to catch up in time, in rainfall and sleet, and we have never had an 
accident.” Well, he was tempting the Creator, evidently, because 
one of his vessels went down in an accident within two months after 
he had given his testimony, and the other vessel belonging to the 
Merchants and Miners went down, and they lost a lot of human lives, 
and there was an investigation and all that kind of thing. Colli¬ 
sions ? Why of course. 

A captain from the Lakes was testifying in regard to a collision 
of his own vessel, and before a judge, some four, five, or six years 
ago. If I had had the time I would have tried to find the decision, 
but it can be found. There are some sailors, you know, that can tell 
the truth. Sailors really are not supposed to tell the truth at all, 
and seamen before the mast are so stunted by their status that no¬ 
body is supposed to believe them. You who am Dwyers and have 


438 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

studied maritime law know that is the philosophy of it. But this 
captain evidently forgot all about the rest of it, and he told the 
judge the truth, which is this: “My instructions were to make time, 
to run at the same speed in the fog or any other kind of weather, 
if the vessel was late.” And the judge, in summing up the case, 
just simply let the world know his opinion of the men who gave that 
order. 

Gentlemen, I have been on board a ship, and so has every seaman 
that has traveled at all, where the order from the bridge was full 
speed ahead, and she was simply jumping away with all there was 
to her, going with all the speed she could, because she had to get 
to hell, heaven, or New York in six days. That was the order. I 
have been on board that kind of vessel as a sailor and as a passenger. 
Collisions? There are plenty of them. And when the collision 
comes somebody has got to save the people that are in the water, 
even on the Lakes. 

While this bill was under consideration a passenger vessel on the 
Lakes took fire out on the Lakes, and the captain was a pretty hard- 
headed, real sailor. He ran her toward the shore as fast as he pos¬ 
sibly could and jammed her clean into the wooden wharf in Chi¬ 
cago. He ran her clean into the wharf as hard as he could, and 
stuck her there and saved his people. 

You provide life-saving appliances for men in buildings, and you 
provide certain exits from public buildings. The exit from a ship, 
gentlemen, is into the water, unless you have got a boat to go in, 
and a boat is absolutely no use to you unless you have got a man who 
can handle it, and a man does not learn that thing in half a day, or 
in half a year, or in a year. It takes an extraordinary man to learn 
that thing in three or four years. 

The standard of skill set by this bill is not high at all, and it is 
not absolute, because if a man has not the skill he is supposed to 
have, or reasonably supposed to have, it is the law of the United 
States, it is the law of every nation, that it is the master’s right 
and the master’s duty to reduce his rating and pay in accordance 
with his demerit. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to ask you one question. There is a conten¬ 
tion that the requirement of two watches for sailors at sea should 
be abandoned if the run is under 8 hours, or 12 hours, or 16 hours. 
The seamen’s act did not make any limitation at all, but required 
that there should be two watches of sailors while at sea. Will you 
give us the reason for not putting any limitation requiring two 
watches at sea, and also whether that would require, if a boat took 
only one trip of four hours—whether it would require two watches 
or not ? 

Mr. Furuseth. If she were to make only one trip, the idea was 
this: If the boat is making only one trip, taking, say, four or five 
hours—that is an imaginary boat, of course, unless it be a sand 
boat—but if she is making that kind of a trip, four or five hours, then, 
of course, there is no necessity for two watches aboard that vessel. 

Mr. Hardy. I just want to make it plain what I am getting at. 
This bill, after all this discussion, did not provide any time limit or 
make any requirement of two watches for sailors while at sea. 

Mr. Furuseth. That is right. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 439 


Mr. Hardy. I want to know why we did it? 

Mr. Furuseth. Because a sailor is supposed to do any kind of 
work m port that he is ordered to do. He stays on the vessel. You 
are providing for watch and watch at sea and nine hours in the 
harbor, and that is necessary in almost every vessel afloat. But 
this bill does not apply to harbors or rivers. 

Mr. Hardy. What 1 want to get at is this: Is it a fact that there 
are very few vessels that run only 4 hours in the 24? 

Mr. Iuruseth. I do not know of any myself. If she runs four 
ilours, two hours one way and two hours another, or four hours 
one way and four on another, that is four hours one way, and she 
g’ets back the same day, and that makes eight. If it is two hours, 
she makes more than one trip or more than two trips, sometimes 
three trips. She is a kind of ferry. 

Mr. PIardy. As I understand it, there was an illustration given 
here of some ship that required 55 minutes, and I think they said 
that she performed five of those round trips a day. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. I have forgotten where that was. 

Mr. Furuseth. That was from Buffalo to Crystal Beach. She is 
a ferry. 

Mr. Hardy. Would it be any easier on the crew to make those 
numerous trips than it would be to make one continuous trip ? 

Mr. Furuseth. It is harder on the crew to make those numerous 
trips than to go right along; it is harder on the crew. 

Mr. Hardy. So that if this law established a two-watch system for 
the firemen, where the vessel was making a 55-minute trip, and then 
returning, and then another 55-minute trip, and they were working 
from early morning until 12 o’clock at night, would that be any 
easier on the firemen by reason of the shortness of the distance ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Not at all; it only gives them more work instead 
of less. 

Mr. Hardy. And if the law made no requirement, then it would 
be left to the vessel owners’ discretion? 

Mr. Furuseth. Then the vessel owner would simply work those 
men 12 hours in 24, or at least 84 hours a week, and he would work 
the sailors that way, and if there were no other requirements, he 
would pick up anybody from anywhere—the jails included—because 
he has done it over and over again. 

The Chairman. Now, will you kindly finish your statement? 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, I was going to say a few words about the 
union, in order to clear up the misunderstanding. Our organiza¬ 
tion is called the International Seamen’s Union of America. It is 
nailed international because we have got branches in Canada—two 
of them. That is all we have got now. We had three. We went 
over to Canada before the seaman’s act was passed for the purpose 
of trying to equalize the wage cost, to raise the Canadian cost up 
to the American cost, so that the American shipowner on the Pacific 
would not be at a disadvantage in the trade up there. That is the 
only reason it is called international. 

It is made up of three groups, which are, for the purpose of tech¬ 
nical things, independent of each other, the sailors, the firemen, the 
oilers and water tenders and the stewards, cooks, and waiters. We 


440 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

are supposed to work together, if it is possible, and we try to work 
together when we can, and that is all there is to that. Sometimes 
we do and sometimes we do not. We are too human to be abso¬ 
lutely what we ought to be at all times. 

Now, from the time that I first came here before the Committee 
on Merchant Marine and Fisheries in 1894, the union has stood ab¬ 
solutely like a rock for American interests and to get the Americans 
to sea. I am a citizen and have been a citizen a great many years. 
Gentlemen, put the American to sea, put your own people to sea. I 
have spent over 40 years here. I came to New York to get away. 
Put the Americans to sea and I will help kill the seamen’s organi¬ 
zation and I will go away forever. The union is a means to an 
end; it is not a job trust, not a padrone system. 

Now, then, you say we have affiliations with the foreign unions. 
Yes. We first joined the transport federation in Europe in order to 
have an opportunity to go and ask for the improvement of the sea¬ 
men’s condition, to abolish imprisonment, to give the same laws to 
the seamen that other human beings have had for more than two gen¬ 
erations, now, even the Negro. Well, I could not get them to listen to 
me in the first convention at Vienna. We paid our money to go 
there and plead with them. Some of them laughed at me, labor men, 
or supposed to be. Socialists! Oh, yes; great Socialists ! I do not 
know what they are anyway. At Copenhagen two years later they 
passed a resolution favoring it and never did anything. Then during 
the latter part of the war the Scandinavian seamen, Denmark, Nor¬ 
way, Sweeden, and England, came together in wliat they called the 
seafarers’ confederation. They were meeting in London while the 
peace treaty was being considered in Paris, and we joined them. 
What for? To get the foreigners to come here? No; to get the con¬ 
dition of the foreigners such that they would not come here. That 
is what we were there for, to raise the wages and improve the condi¬ 
tions in Europe so that each man will sail in his own nation’s ship, 
and give to the United States a chance of competition, and if the 
seamen’s act was enforced there would not be 3 per cent difference 
between the wages now, even between Japan and the United States. 

Three of the main features of the seamen’s act have never been 
enforced. You know something, gentlemen, of fire brigades in cities. 
Suppose you had a fire brigade in one of your big cities, in which 
the captain and his lieutenants spoke one language and all of his 
crew spoke another language, and some one man or two men or three 
men in the whole force should be there to translate the orders from 
the officers to the crew, or the requests from the crew to the officers. 
How long would you stand for it? You would not stand for it for 
two minutes, in a city, and yet you go aboard their vessels to go 
across the ocean in which that is the situation. You go on the Lakes, 
in which that is the situation, because there is nothing to hinder the 
Lake vessel owners from sending to Spain for men. They have 
manned their vessels with Spaniards, Greeks, Portuguese, and Ital¬ 
ians on the Lakes before, and, by the way, the Goodrich line, when 
the inspection service compelled them at last to put a crew on the 
Columbus so that there would be at least somebody to handle the 
life-saving appliances, they sent down on the Atlantic coast for 28 
Italians. There is nothing to prevent them from doing that now. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN^ ACT. 441 

and they are doing it, I suppose—I do not know, because I am not 
living on the Lakes. I am only taking what I can get from books, 
Avhat I can get from reports, what I can get from the men, and what 
1 can get from the shipowners when they talk. 

Let me impress upon you again that our organization is there to 
improve the condition of the men so that the American will go to 
sea, and we have stood, for such legislation so that the foreigner 
would be compelled to pay an equal wage and have an equal cost of 
operation with America, and thus give America a chance. And we 
had it practically, up until the terrible upheaval in the values of the 
money of the different countries. 

Will you excuse me for just saying something more that will ex¬ 
plain to you more absolutely what our organization stands for? We 
asked, in the conference between the shipowners, the unions, and 
Admiral Benson, “ Will you give the first chance of shipping to the 
American citizen?” I know there are two of them; there is one 
naturalized, and there is the native born, one by choice, and one by 
accident. I said, “ Will you give primary employment for ratings 
they can fill to American citizens, and then, if there be not enough, 
to those who have taken out their first citizenship papers, and treat 
them according to their seniority?” He hesitated, as you will find 
in this pamphlet here, and the shipowners said, “ No.” If they had 
been willing to do that, we would have dropped everything else. 
What would have been the effect on the union doing that? In all 
probability, it would be reduced from 108,000 to probably 8,000. But 
if the Americans can go to sea, then the Americans themselves will 
deal with that question. They have relatives and friends in the 
vicinity they come from, and they can bother their Congressman and 
Senators with letters from their relatives explaining their condition, 
and you will believe them, whereas some of you, I think, think you 
have some good reason for not believing such as me because I am a 
homeless, kinless loon. That is all. 

We offered that, and they turned it down. Get the condition of 
the seaman so that he can live, and the condition of the vessels and 
of the seamen so that there is some reasonable safety, and you will 
never see my face again, you will never hear from me any more. I 
am not working for the few dollars that I get. I get no more than 
is necessary to dress me as I am dressed now, eat coarse food, and 
spend money on books and tobacoo. That is all I want, and when 
I can not get it, I know how to finish it all. 

I thank you, gentlemen. I am ready to answer any questions you 
may put to me. 

Mr. Scott. I only want to ask you a couple of questions. At the 
opening of your statement you said, if I understood you correctly, 
and I hope you will correct me if I did not understand you—you 
commented on the decision of the Supreme Court, and identified 
it as what is commonly known as the Arago decision. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes"; that is'what we called it; Robertson v. Bald¬ 
win is the official title. . ,,, ,, 

Mr Scott. And then you supplemented that by saying thatthere 
was some injunction by the court that you would not obey. Did I 

understand you correctly? . . ,,, T u 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; there are some injunctions that I would not 

obey; yes, sir. 


442 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Scott. Legally issued by a court ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; if it was legally issued, no. Then I would 
obey it. I disobeyed an injunction on the Pacific coast a year ago, 
and I was called into court to show cause why I should not be sent 
to jail for contempt. The master took testimony. He went on what 
the lawyers call a fishing expedition. I told him I would not answer 
any more of his questions. The whole matter was referred to the 
judge of the Circuit Court of the United States sitting in San Fran¬ 
cisco. He examined into the whole case and threw it all out 
Just now they are trying to get an injunction against some seamen 
down in Baltimore. Judge Rose refused to grant it a few clays ago. 
They have appealed again for an injunction. He told them that it 
was not equitable, it had not anything to do with property rights, 
and equity is for the protection of property rights, and he said there 
was not any interference with property right. Injunctions are not 
for the purpose of preserving income from property, but to pre¬ 
serve property. Now, if anybody says to me that I must not talk to 
my friend or to my neighbor, being a free man—or dreaming I am, 
at any rate—I talk to them nevertheless, and I take the consequences, 
and I find that that was exactly what the Americans always did. 

Mr. Scott. Then, if I understand you correctly, there is a char¬ 
acter of injunction issued by a regular court- 

Mr. Furuseth. Sometimes issued; yes. 

Mr. Scott. Sometimes issued—I will accept your language—there 
is a regular injunction sometimes issued by a regular court of 
record—— 

Mr. Furuseth. Will you please strike out the word “ regular”? 

Mr. Scott. Well, by a court, which you would refuse to obey, based 
on your own determination as to the merits of the controversy? 

Mr. Furuseth. The way you frame your question reminds me of 
the question that is often put, “ Have you ceased beating your wife ” ? 
If I say yes, I acnowledge that I have beaten her; if I say no, I am 
still beating her. The fact of the matter is that I never beat her, 
of course. That is the meaning of it. I never had any wife, so it 
does not apply to me, but that is the meaning of it. Your question 
is a compound question, in which you say a regular injunction issued 
under such conditions, and you ask me then, would I obey such an 
injunction? Now, it is not fair to ask me in that way. It is not fair 
to put me in that position, and it can not be done for any purpose 
except to prejudice the members of this committee. But I will 
answer you as well as I can. 

Mr. Scott. I am willing to put my question in any shape that will 
comply v T ith the statement you made voluntarily at the opening of 
your testimony. I do not know why you made it, Mr. Furuseth. 

Mr. Furuseth. I made it to clear away, if I could, the prejudice 
that might exist in the minds of some members of the committee here 
because of the misquotation that had been made by the Boston Herald. 

Mr. Scott. I think you had entirely covered that in the statement 
which you made at that time justifying the previous accusation of 
the newspapers, but when you opened your statement, if I understood 
you correctly, you said that there was a character of injunction issued 
by a court which you would never obey. 

Mr. Furuseth. That is true. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 443 


Mr. Hardy. I am not objecting to this, Mr. Chairman, because I 
want to ask some questions along the same line, but, of course, it has 
nothing to do with the bill. 

Mr. Scott. I understand that. 

Mr. Furuseth. I am not inviting this question. I do not know 
that it has anything to do with the bill, but I am not running away 
from it. 

Mr. Scott. I understand. 

Mr. Furuseth. I would be mighty glad on another occasion, or if 
the committee wants it now, to go into the whole question of the use 
of injunctions. I did that before the Committee on the Judiciary 
twice, and the membership of the Committee on the Judiciary of 
the House of Representatives treated me with distinguished con¬ 
sideration afterwards, and four of them sat in the House for a whole 
night to see that the seamen’s bill went through. 

Mr. Scott. May I say that the sole purpose of my inquiry in that 
respect was solely for the purpose of throwing light, if possible, on 
the general situation. The gentleman, if I understood him correctly, 
indicated that there was a character of injunction which he would 
not obey, but it would naturally be based presumably on law, and 
now, if that was correct, he is coming before this committee asking 
for legislation which he desires to be obeyed. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Scott, do you consider an injunction more sacred 
than a mandamus or any other order of a court ? 

Mr. Scott. I have always had a very sacred regard for the regular 
procedure. The minute you strike a blow at the jurisprudence of the 
country you strike a blow at the very foundation of our system of 
government. 

Mr. Furuseth. May I suggest to the gentleman that there is a 
fundamental distinction—he is evidently not a lawyer. 

May I suggest to the gentleman that there is a fundamental dis¬ 
tinction between equity and law, a fundamental distinction, absolutely 
fundamental, in law and in equity. 

Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Chairman, this academic question might be 
very interesting, but T do not think it throws any light on the issue 
involved in this bill. I would like very much to conclude this 
witness’s testimony, if it is possible, to-day. 

Mr. Hardy. I would like to say, that as law abiding as I am, I 
believe courts might issue orders that I would not obey. Judge 
Lindsey is in jail now because he will not divulge a statement that a 
little boy made to him in confidence. If I were a physician and a 
confidential communication were made to me, and the court tried to 
make me tell it, I would not do it. If I were a participant in a 
crime, and were offered immunity upon condition that I testify 
against the principals, I would not do it. There are a number of 
orders that dictatorial courts may issue that a free man has a right 
to disobey. That may be anarchy, but I do not think it is. I think 
this has all been interjected into this hearing, not for any bearing it 
has on the bill, so I would like to discard the whole thing. 

Mr. Briggs. The distinction seems to be between orders that a 
court has power to issue, and orders that a court has no power to 
issue, whether they are binding or not. 

Mr. Gahn. But illegal orders can be set aside. There is a method 
provided for settling that. 


444 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. The question is whether they are void or voidable. 
In one case they are respected until the appellate court sets them 
aside. If they are absolutely void, the court has no power to issue 
them. 

Mr. Hardy. I know of judges who have gone to jail rather than 
obey orders, and they would have stayed in jail if it had not been for 
the fact that the higher court was not as dictatorial as the lower 
court. There comes a time when a man has a right to take his free¬ 
dom into his own hands, and disobey the order of dictatorial court. 

Mr. Chindblom. This subject was opened by the witness himself 
when he said that there were certain injunctions that he would not 
obey. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me call the committee’s attention to the fact that 
it was opened by the chairman of the committee by reading a publica¬ 
tion in a newspaper, and the witness took occasion to answer the 
publication. 

Mr. Chindblom. But that publication was not before the com¬ 
mittee, and did not have anything to do with this bill. 

Mr. Hardy. It did not, but the chairman called it to the attention 
of the committee, and the witness took occasion to explain. 

Mr. Mills. Now, you dealt with the question of the respective 
merits of lifeboats and life rafts in case of accident, Mr. Furuseth? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. And you pointed out that in case of a heavy gale of 
from 40 to 50 miles an hour the raft would not be a very good safety 
appliance. Now, is it not a fact that in a gale of 40 or 50 miles an 
hour it would be almost impossible to get your passengers off in 
lifeboats? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; that is not the fact. 

Mr. Mills. Well, it would be a very difficult problem, would it not? 

Mr. Furuseth. It would be difficult, of course. That is the reason 
you need boats and skilled men. 

Mr. Mills. I call your attention to the report of the Committee 
on Commerce of the United States Senate, after the Titanic disaster, 
in which they sajq on page 12: “ Had the sea been rough, it is ques¬ 
tionable whether any of the lifeboats of the Titanic would have 
reached the water without being damaged or destroyed.” 

Mr. Furuseth. That is perfectly true, because she had a picked-up 
crew so unskilled that that would have been the result. But a large 
number of the boats could not be used anyway. She had boats to 
save about 1,100 people, but only 700 and some were saved. In 
other words, because of the lack of skill of the crew, in spite of the 
smooth water she lost 400 people that she had no business to lose 
at all. 

Mr. Mills. That is not the opinion of the Senate committee that 
investigated the matter very thoroughly, because they go on to say— 
I am not going to assert that she did not have enough life equip¬ 
ment, and that there was not great confusion, because they found 
that, but they say that all of the lifeboats could not have been low¬ 
ered in the heavy sea, for the following reasons: “ The point of 
suspension of the Titarnc boats was about 70 feet above the level of 
the sea. Had the ship been rolling heavily the lifeboats, as they were 
lowered, would have swung out from the side of the ship as it"rolled 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN J S ACT. 445 


toward them, and on the return roll would have swung back and 
crushed against its side. Every effort should be made to improve 
boat-handling devices and to improve the control of boats while 
being lowered.” 

Now, as a matter of common sense, is it not a fact that in a heavy 
gale, heavy enough to sink a modern passenger ship, it would be a 
very difficult proposition to get off 500 or 600 passengers in lifeboats ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Of course, it is difficult, but it is done. 

Mr. Mills. Could it be done ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; unquestionably. If you could not do it in a 
50-mile gale, the boats would not be worth anything at all. 

Mr. Mills Well, they might be. Now, let me ask you another 
question, whether you know of any passenger vessels on the Lakes 
that have been sunk by reason of the weather? I am speaking of a 
storm. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not. 

Mr. Mills. Do you know of any passenger vessels that have been 
lost in recent years—and when I say recent years I want to cover 
the modern steam passenger vessel on the ocean—in storms, by rea¬ 
son of storm? 

Mr. F uruseth. What period of time are you taking? 

Mr. Mills. Let us take the last 15 j^ears, or go back to 1900. I am 
not trying to trip you into any answer. This is what I am getting at: 
Is it not a fact that the great danger at sea or on the Lakes to-day, in 
so far as passenger vessels are concerned, is from collision? 

Mr. Furuseth. Fire and collision, on the Lakes particularly, be¬ 
cause—now, let me help you a little there and help Mr. Scott. The 
passenger vessels on the Lakes watch the weather signals very care¬ 
fully, the passenger boats watch for the signals very carefully, and 
while a passenger boat is not any less subject to a gale of wind than 
another boat or another vessel, by watching carefully the weather 
signals they manage very often—not always, but very often—to keep 
out of a gale by going into port for shelter. 

Mr. Mills. Well, the chief danger is from collision, and a certain 
danger is from fire? 

Mr. Furuseth. And stranding. 

Mr. Mills. Yes; and running ashore in a fog? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. Now, assuming a reasonably smooth sea in the summer, 
is not the life raft under those circumstances an effective instrument 
of safety? 

Mr. Furuseth. In a reasonably smooth sea, for males, dealing 
with males, yes, they will be; in a reasonably smooth sea, such as 
you have in the summer time on the Lakes. For women and children, 
no; I do not think so. 

Mr. Mills. Well, is it not fair to assume that when these per¬ 
centages were established and with the recognized rule of the sea 
that women and children should go first, the idea was that the women 
and children could get into the lifeboats and the men be taken care 
of on the rafts? 

Mr. Furuseth. Sure, that is what we always thought of. But I 
am not arguing now to increase the life-saving appliances on the 
Lakes. We are asking } t ou to let them remain what they are. They 
are little enough now. 


446 AMENDING SECTIONS 2. 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN S ACT. 


Mr. Mills. I just wanted to cover your testimony, which indicated 
that a life raft was not a very useful instrument for safety. 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, of course, it is not. 

Mr. Mills. You made a statement that Admiral Benson and ship¬ 
owners, in the present controversy, which has nothing to do with the 
question before us, but I do not like to let such a statement go un¬ 
challenged, were opposing the request of your union to put as many 
Americans as possible in the American merchant marine, raising, of 
course, the inference that the shipowners and Admiral Benson were 
discriminating against Americans in favor of foreigners. In that 
connection, I would like to ask you what is the Sea Service Bureau 
of the Shipping Board? 

Mr. Furuseth. An employment office, nothing else. 

Mr. Mills. Have they ever trained any seamen during the war? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; the training service did that. 

Mr. Mills. Well, was that connected with the Sea Service Bureau 
of the Shipping Board? 

Mr. Furuseth. In some way connected, but the one trained the 
men and the other shipped them. In other words, it is an employ¬ 
ment office. 

Mr. Mills. Is it not a fact that over 30,000 Americans were trained 
under the auspices of the Shipping Board during the course of the 
war ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; that is to say, they got some kind of training. 

Mr. Mills. Well, yes; they got some kind of training, and the 
Sea Service Bureau is under the Shipping Board, is it not? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; but it did not do that work. 

Mr. Mills. Now, let us get at the facts. The Sea Service Bureau 
to-day is furnishing, or supposed to furnish, seamen to the American 
vessels, is it not, as an employment bureau, as you described it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Mills. Is it a fact that in January last, of the number of men 
furnished by the Sea Service Bureau and trained by the Sea Service 
Bureau, 73 per cent were Americans; in February, 77 per cent: and 
in March, 81 per cent ? Are you prepared to dispute those figures? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; I am not, but- 

Mr. Mills. Then I will ask you one further question, whether the 
first request submitted by your union was to do away with the Sea 
Service Bureau? 

Mr. Furuseth. That was the first one. 

Mr. Mills. A bureau that was furnishing 81 per cent of Americans 
to the American merchant marine- 

Mr. Furuseth. And was- 

Mr. Mills. Sixty days ago? 

Mr. Furuseth. And also was furnishing, exclusively, Spaniards 
who could not understand the language, if they were called for, and 
also was furnishing other things. 

Mr. Mills: Only 19 per cent. I would like also to ask you what 
percentage- 

Mr. Furuseth. Now, will you please let me explain how the Sea 
Service Bureau has been furnishing those men? 

Mr. Mills. If you want to go into the whole controversy. 

Mr. Furuseth. But surely you do not want to mislead anybody; 
you do not want to bring about a false impression ? 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 447 


Mr. Mills. As far as I am concerned, I want to go into the matter 
fully, but I would rather complete my line of questions before you 
get off- 

Mr. Furuseth. Gentlemen, I am up against a question now where 
I am compelled to answer a question yes or no, and in either case I 
would not be stating the truth. You have made a statement about 
the number of men furnished by the Sea Service Bureau. Now, I 
say the Sea Service Bureau furnished their men through the unions; 
that is what they did; and they put down on the Sea Service Bureau’s 
records men that never went through the Sea Service Bureau at all, 
and I am prepared to prove that if this question has anything to do 
with it at any time. When anybody wants to investigate that, I am 
prepared to prove everything 1 have said on the subject. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you this question : How many mem¬ 
bers of your seamen’s union are foreigners and how many Americans? 

Mr. Furuseth. Fifty-one per cent native Americans on the 1st 
of December, 1920, by actual count of individual men, and between 
7 and 10 per cent naturalized Americans. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you whether in the last few months 
you have not been constantly furnishing an increasing number of 
foreigners through your unions? 

Mr. Furuseth. We have not. 

Mr. Mills. You deny that? 

Mr. Furtjseth. Absolutely. 

Mr. Mills. You know that charge has been made? 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, there have been so many charges made 
against us in our union; as many as were made against the German 
Emperor. 

Mr. Mills. Let me ask you whether the ships sailing from Van¬ 
couver, Canadian ships, pay their crews overtime, one and a half? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not believe they do, because they employ 
Chinamen. 

Mr. Mills. Is it or not true that the Canadian branches of your 
union furnish men to the Canadian ships? 

Mr. Furuseth. To the coastwise ships in Canada, a few. Some of 
the men were sailing on the sea from Vancouver to foreign countries. 

Mr. Mills. All right, let us get the Canadian ships that do not sail 
to foreign countries, coastwise shipping, and let me ask you whether 
you furnish any men to those? 

Mr. Furuseth. Coastwise vessels? 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. No ; we do not; but there are men who are mem¬ 
bers of our organization, who go down to the docks and are picked 
by the officers, engineers, or mates. There is no shipping office there. 

Mr. Mills. Those men sail on Canadian vessels that do not pay 
one and a half time for overtime ? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is true. 

Mr. Mills. Would you allow any of your union men to sail on 
any American vessel on the Pacific coast that did not pay one and a 
half time for overtime? 

Mr. Furuseth. To begin with, I have not got any more to do with 
them than you have. 

Mr. Mills. I am not speaking of you personally. I am asking 
whether you of the union- 


448 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Furusetii. What the union would do and what it will do I 
do not know, nor what they can do now, but the agreement between 
the shipowners on the Pacific coast and the seamen on the Pacific 
coast for nearly 20 years has been that as far as vessels at sea are 
concerned, going to sea or coming from sea, or at sea, there is no 
overtime. In the harbor- 

Mr. Mills. Now, let me.state right there, because I may be entirely 
mistaken, that in 1910 I went up to Alaska, sailing from Seattle. 
I was informed that by reason of the overtime paid the crew the 
members of the crew were getting more pay than the captain of the 
vessel. Now, was that overtime at that time limited to the loading 
and unloading of the vessel at the ports at which she stopped ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolutely limited to work done in the harbors— 
loading. 

Mr. Mills. But you had an 8-hour day on those vessels? 

Mr. Furuseth. We had nothing of the kind, sir. 

Mr. Mills. What sort of a day did you have ? 

Mr. Furuseth. A 12-hour day. 

Mr. Mills. As to all of the- 

Mr. Furuseth. As to everybody in the deck department. 

Mr. Mills. How t about below decks? 

Mr. Furuseth. Below decks they are firemen, oilers, or water 
tenders, and they had an 8-hour day. 

Mr. Mills. And the stewards? 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, any time from 10 or 15 hours up to 16 or 
18 hours. 

Mr. Mills. Well, that was not so in 1910 on the vessel on which 
I traveled. 

Mr. Furuseth. That was so in 1910, without any question. The 
kitchen crew’s time begins at 5 o’clock in the morning and ends at 
8 o’clock at night, and it has always been that way. 

Mr. Mills. We are getting afield there, but the fact is that Ameri¬ 
can coastwise vessels do pay overtime? 

Mr. Furuseth. Sure they do. 

Mr. Mills. And the Canadian vessels do not? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is true, too. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you what your union would do to 
a union man who sailed on an American vessel that did not pay 
overtime in the coastwise trade? 

Mr. Furuseth. What would we do to him? 

Mr. Mills. Yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. A charge would be filed against him in the union, 
which would be submitted to a trial committee, and if he violated 
the rules and the agreement he would be fined from $2.50 to $5 for 
the first offense, and for the second offense $5 or $7, or $10 at the 
most, and for the third offense he would be expelled. 

Mr. Mills. There is one other question I want to ask you- 

Mr. Furuseth. May I amplify my answer just a little, so as to 
make it perfectly understandable to everybody? 

Mr. Briggs. You may answer it. 

Mr. Furuseth. When we have expelled him, we usually find him 
as a petty officer on board of a ship having command of us, and tak¬ 
ing it out of us again because we did it. 







AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 449 

Mr. Mills. I want to ask you whether on a vessel — and I am told 
there are some vessels; I am not familiar with the lines on the Great 
.Lakes—on a vessel that had a 5-hour run from port to port—there 
may be some stops—and a 5-hour run in return, making 10 hours 
at sea out of the 24, whether you would consider it essential to have 
three watches for the oilers and water tenders; and if so, why ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, to begin with, I am not an oiler or water 
tender. I never sailed in the fireroom or in the engine room. The 
technical knowledge of those places is to be got from men like this 
man here, Conway, because he is a thoroughly experienced fireman, 
oiler, and water tender. 

Mr. Mills. \ ou would rather not go into that yourself ? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is right. 

Mr. Mills. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Furuseth, I want to ask you something about able 
seamen. We have had a good deal of discussion about it, and the 
skill of those men as contrasted with the ability of the certified 
lifeboat man. You have given a good deal of discussion, and other 
Avitnesses haA r e, too, as to the general qualifications of those men, but 
1 Avant to ask you a little as to Avhat special service making those 
men more A r aluable than other men is rendered by them in times of 
emergency ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Able seamen, you mean ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. In other Avords, a good deal of testimony here 
Avas offered to the effect that it took an able seaman to properly 
launch a lifeboat loaded with people. 

Mr. Furuseth. Lower it. 

Mr. Briggs. Lower it ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I think the testimony was that it took tAvo to a life¬ 
boat. Does their skill end there, or does their superiority end there 
over other men, after the lifeboat is lowered? 

Mr. Furuseth. No. 

Mr. Briggs. What is their further use, then, in Avhich they are 
superior ? 

Mr. Furuseth. After she is in the water? 

Mr. Briggs. After she is in the Avater, in heavy Avater or a storm? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. In order to keep the boat from sAvamping 
and drowning everybody, there is usually provided what is called a 
drag or sea anchor, almost like a sugar loaf in shape, Avith a big hole, 
and a little hole in the other end, and tied on to a rope with a crowds 
foot, so as to hold it. From that drag goes a rope 30, 40, or 55 
fathoms long, a line that is strong but very slight, as neat as Ave can 
get it. One man stands forward in the boat- 

Mr. Briggs. I Avish you Avould designate technically Avliat you call 
that man, if he has any special status. 

Mr. Furuseth. An able seaman stands forward, and Avhen the 
boat is riding against the sea, having its nose or boAv against the sea. 

Mr. Briggs. What do you mean by against the sea ? A great many 
people on this committee are not technical men. 

Mr. Furuseth. Billows coming this way [indicating]. You have 
seen the sea ? 

Mr. Briggs. I have seen it, but some people have not. 

48420—21-29 


450 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr; Chindblom. With the waves coming toward it? 

Mr. Furuseth. The waves of the sea coming this way [indicating | 
and the boat rides this way against it [indicating]. 

Mr. Briggs. The boat faces the sea ? 

Mr. Chindblom. The movement of your arms do not go in the 
record. 

Mr. Furuseth. I know. Let me see if I can get it in some kind 
of language so that it can be understood. 

Mr. Hardy. I think it is, when you say, “ This way against it.” 

Mr. Furuseth. When the boat is lowered into the water it is al¬ 
ways lowered with the bow against the sea, or against the billows, or 
against the waves. Then there is a man standing forward; that is, 
in the bow in the boat. 

Mr. Briggs. Who is that man? 

Mr. Furuseth. An able seaman—that is, if you have enough of 
them to do it. If you have enough, that is what he does. 

Mr. Chindblom. Does that position give him any particular name 
or title? 

Mr. Furuseth. He is the bowman. You would call him that. He 
stands there and he holds on to a line and makes it fast around a bit, 
if he has it, or there is usually something there so he can make the line 
fast. He surges out the line, slacks out the line, so as to let the boat 
come back and be able to ride the waves. A boat raises forward 30°, 
sometimes 40°, to mount a heavy sea. In order to do that the boat 
has got to be free and perfectly buoyant and alive. The sea anchor 
is perhaps 10,15, 30, or whatever fathoms it may be, ahead of the boat 
in the water, and when the boat has a tendency to swing off so as 
not to head the sea, so as not to have its bow clean against the sea, it 
tries to get away to the left or to the right so as to get broadside- 

Mr. Briggs. Broadside to the waves ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Broadside to the waves, and if she gets broadside 
to the waves she is gone, and nothing can help her any more. 

Mr. Briggs. She gets in the trough of the sea ? 

Mr. Furuseth. She gets in the trough of the sea, and she is gone: 
she is filled in a minute and tumbles over. He holds on to that sea 
anchor line, as we call it. When the boat has mounted the wave and 
is going down he pulls in on the line, and as he meets the next wave 
he slacks up. The purpose of it is to keep the bow of the boat straight 
against the waves. That is one able seaman. 

The other able seaman stands in the stern of the boat, in the other 
end, and he handles a sweep, as we call it, a big oar. The boat is not 
moving ahead through the water; the water is moving past the boat, 
and therefore the rudder is of no use, so you have got to have some¬ 
thing to steer the boat, and for that reason we have got an oar. It is 
dually a larger oar than the others, and sometimes they call it a 
aweep. Anyhow, you have got to have an oar there, and then you 
stand and handle that oar so as to help the bowman keep the face, 
nose, or bow right straight against the waves. With two such men 
knowing their business you can ride in a 75-mile gale, and with a 
boat full of people, if it is not overloaded. 

Mr. Briggs. Does that work require any special degree of skill, or 
is it work that any man could do, or that a certificated lifeboat man 
could da 2 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN- J S ACT. 451 

Mr. Furuseth. A certificated lifeboat man usually needs help him¬ 
self. This work requires the highest. skill in seamanship that the 
world has got, and it is only acquired after years of experience, either 
in boating on the beach, in fishing, or in handling boats, on board of 
a ship, and in handling weights, etc. It is the highest skill that a man 
can ever acquire, and it requires higher skill for that than any other 
thing. 

Mr. Chindblom. How far back of the boat does the anchor ride? 

Mr. Furuseth. How far ahead of the boat, you mean? 

Mr. Chindblom. Yes; ahead. 

Mr. Furuseth. Well, 15 fathoms, or 10 fathoms, at least. The in¬ 
ternational regulations provide that this anchor shall have an oil bag 
on it—and, by the way, that oil bag on that sea anchor was put in 
the international regulations at my motion in London in 1913- 

Mr. Briggs. Is that to hold the anchor up ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; you do not Avant to hold it up; you Avant to 
have it far enough down in the Avater. 

Mr. Briggs. It holds it up some, because it has some buoyancy ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; but the main purpose of it is that the sea 
squeezes the oil out of the bag, and then distributes it and prevents 
the sea from breaking, which it Avould otherAvise. 

Mr. Briggs. It keeps the sea a little smoother? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. The purpose, I suppose, of this anchor is to steady the 
boat and help hold her head up against the waves? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. So that she can float over the waves instead of being 
crushed under them and havdng the waves engulf her and destroy 
her? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is it exactly; that is the purpose of it. 

STATEMENT OF MR. CHARLES J. BOUR, PRESIDENT AND GEN¬ 
ERAL MANAGER CHICAGO, DULUTH & GEORGIAN BAY TRAN¬ 
SIT CO., CHICAGO, ILL. 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the shipowners are not 
here as an organization. We came individually to state our case 
before this committee. 

I have heard the testimony of Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Furuseth re- 
garing the skill and ability necessary to qualify as an able seaman. 
My position perhaps is a little different from the a Average steamboat 
company. We operate the largest exclusively long-haul passenger 
lines on the Great Lakes, from Chicago to Buffalo, via the Georgian 
Bay, and from Chicago to Duluth, via the Georgian Bay, a route cov¬ 
ering approximately over 2,000 miles, a week’s cruise. 

There has not been a word said here by the gentlemen representing 
the unions as to the workings of the seamen’s act. I want to give 
you a concrete example for the reason Avhy the provision of section 13 
providing for the substitution of certificated lifeboat men for able 
seamen should be passed. I will give an example. I was on the ship 
Avhen it happened, and it is up to you to know whether or not it 
should be. We left Chicago at 1.30 on Saturday, arriving in Buffalo 
at 8 o’clock the following Wednesday morning. The boatsAvain in 


452 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

charge of the able seamen, as on every vessel, went to the first officer 
and asked for a day off at Buffalo. Mind you, we were there nine 
hours. The first officer said that he could have his time off after he 
had finished his work, which consisted of scrubbing, that is all. I 
will tell you what able seamen are after a while on our boat. 

Mr. Hardy. I will call attention to the fact, Mr. Chairman, that 
this is not rebuttal testimony; it is a matter about which there has 
been no testimony, and an entirely new matter. 

Mr. Bour. I just want to show you how the Lake lines, and par¬ 
ticularly my company, are affected as regards the duties of an able 
seaman. 

Mr. Briggs. I would like to say that I am interested, for one, in 
getting the facts. I have no disposition to make a hard-and-fast 
rule. 

Mr. Hardy. But I did not want this to be put in and have it said 
that nobody on the other side could answer it. 

Mr. Bour. I have no objection to that. I will answer any ques¬ 
tions you Congressmen put before me. 

Mr. Briggs. I have no objection to that. I think the committee is 
after information, and all we want is the facts. I think the judge 
and myself and all of us are. 

Mr. Chindblom. Let the witness proceed. We are all agreed. 

Mr. Bour. The boatswain, however, left without finishing his 
work. Upon his return an hour before leaving time—we were there 
nine hours at Buffalo—he had some little controversy with the first 
officer and he struck, taking eight of his able seamen with him. As 
a result we endeavored to fill out the crew. The first officer went 
to the union headquarters at Buffalo to get sufficient men to man 
the ship. We were unable to do it. We had 600 passengers aboard 
at that time. A great many of them had made reservations at 
Chicago for their return to their points, and a great many of them 
had wired reservations from Buffalo to points out of Chicago. We 
were unable to get a full crew, and knowing, as we did—the master 
did—I was aboard the ship at the time, and I know what I am 
talking about, that we were violating the marine laws by leaving 
without a full crew—we proceeded to Detroit, reported the matter 
to the customs department at Detroit, and endeavored to fill our crew, 
which we were unable to do. 

We proceeded to Chicago with a less number of men than required 
by law and reported the matter to the customs department at Chi¬ 
cago. As a result we were fined $500 for violating the marine law. 
If we had been privileged to use certificated lifeboat men in an 
emergency, which existed at the time, we would not have been obliged 
to violate the law. 

The duties of an able seaman, so far as I am concerned—I have not 
been a steamboat man for 40 years, but I have been very active since 
1917—are not such that it requires great skill and ability. 

There has not been a bit of evidence introduced here to show that 
any vessel has ever been destroyed on account of the weather where 
lifeboats have had to be lowered with passengers. Everything has 
been based on theory. There has been nothing on practice. And I 
say, gentlemen, that it is not fair that the Government of the United 
States should impose such burdens on the vessel owners as to pro¬ 
hibit them from serving the public. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 453 


O’Brien testified here, I think, two or three days ago that the 
Seamen’s 1 nion was the only body representing the public. I will 
say to you, gentlemen, that the steamboat companies, the vessel 
owners, are the only men representing the public. Their very exist¬ 
ence depends upon the public, and naturally they must represent the 
public; and it is not fair, gentlemen, that undue burdens should be 
imposed on the vessel owners which will prohibit them from serving 
the public. 

Our season is less than three months. One boat runs 63 days and 
another boat not to exceed 72 days, operating during the summer 
months, July and August. 

T am not so much interested in the three-watch system as some of 
the other lines. I can see where they are. We have always em¬ 
ployed a three-watch system in our firehold before the law and after 
the law. Our runs are from 18 to 22 hours, a week’s cruise, and 
naturally we want men to live properly, and we have every facility 
for giving the service to the men. We have shower baths and 
toilets, and they get the same food that the passengers do. I have 
no objection to that, but I do say that Ave should be able to operate 
and serve the public in case of an emergency. 

Mr. Scott. How long has your company been operating? 

Mr. Bour. Since 1913. 

Mr. Scott. How long have you been operating passenger ships? 

Mr. Bour. Me? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Bour. I became active in 1917, although I have been an offi¬ 
cer, but not active until 1917. 

Mr. Scott. You have been identified with the passenger service 
since nineteen hundred and when? 

Mr. Bour. The ships were built in 1913 and 1914, and I have been 
identified since 1917. Our boats are exclusively passenger boats. 
We do not carry a pound of freight. 

Mr. Scott. How long have you been associated with passenger 
service compa nies ? 

Mr. Bour. Since 1913 with the steamboats. I have been in the 
railroad business for 30 years. 

Mr. Scott. Since that time how many passengers has your com¬ 
pany lost in consequence of disaster? 

Mr. Bour. None; and never had a suicide even, and that seems to 
be about the only line where that has not happened. 

Mr. Scott. How many passengers have you carried in that period ? 

Mr. Bour. I presume we have carried perhaps 100,000. 

Mr. Scott. Does that complete your statement ? 

Mr. Bour. That practically completes my statement. I will say 
to you gentlemen that I can start in and make an able seaman in an 
hour, so far as his necessary requirements according to the law are 
concerned. 

Mr. Scott. If he possesses ordinary intelligence? 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. May I ask you one other question ? Since the seamen’s 
law was passed, how does the character of the seamen compare with 
the character of the seamen previous to the enactment of the law? 
Are they better or are they about the same ? 


454 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Bour. They are no better now. We have our drills every 
week- 

Mr. Hardy. May I ask you a question? Did you pay that $500 
fine? 

Mr. Bour. It was remitted, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Hardy. I was just going to ask you if it was not remitted. 

Mr. Bour. That was the first offense. I do not know if the second 
would be. 

Mr. Hardy. That was one fine that was remitted where you vio¬ 
lated the law on account of the extraordinary conditions? 

Mr. Bour. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You did not pay a dollar of that fine? 

Mr. Bour. It was remitted; but it was a violation of the law, 
nevertheless, which we do not want to do. 

Mr. Hardy. You said you could easily have gotten a crew if you 
had been allowed to ship certificated lifeboat men. You could have 
gotten them easier if there had been no requirements, could you not? 

Mr. Bour. Congressman, there are requirements for certificated 
lifeboat men. 

Mr. Hardy. That is under this law, though. 

Mr. Bour. It may be; but we are perfectly willing to abide by the 
law. 

Mr. Hardy. Before the seamen’s act you could have gotten men 
from the barrooms and jails, could you not? 

Mr. Chindblom. The navigation service had something to do 
with it. 

Mr. Hardy. So far as the law was concerned, the Steamboat-In¬ 
spection Service could have let you go with a crew none of whom had 
ever been on board a vessel before, could they not ? 

Mr. Bour. We got along just as well. 

Mr. Hardy. I am not asking you how you got along. There was 
no law, was there? 

Mr. Bour. Just the same, there has been no difference in our 
operation. 

Mr. Hardy. No difference in your operation? 

Mr. Bour. No. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, why are you complaining of the law? 

Mr. Bour. I am not, Congressman, complaining seriously of the 
law, only I do say this, that the law should be so that it would enable 
us to serve the public in an emergency. 

Mr. Hardy. You are complaining of the action that you claim the 
unions took. 

Mr. Bour. Absolutely; and I will tell you that we can not ship a 
man unless he is a union man. Our maids who take care of the state¬ 
rooms and make the beds are even in the union. 

Mr. Hardy. You know the law does not make any such condition 
as that. 

Mr. Bour. I understand. I am not charging the law directly with 
the conditions; but indirectly, yes. 

Mr. Hardy. What you want to do is to do away with the require¬ 
ments so that you will not have any able seamen on your boats? 

Mr. Bour. No; I do not want that. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you be willing to be required to have any? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 455 

Mr. Bour. I do not want to. I want to be able to operate my 
ships, whether the union can furnish me a man or whether I have 
got to go out and get men who are not able seamen. That is all. 

Mr. Hardy. You want to be able to operate your ships, then, 
without any able seamen? 

Mr. Bour. I want to be able to operate my ships with men who 
have got the intelligence. 

Mr. Hardy. Men that you think have? 

Mr. Bour. Men that I think have, and I am a pretty good judge. 

Mr. Hardy. But you are perfectly willing to let the law have no 
restraining power over you? 

Mr. Bour. No; I want regulation. 

Mr. Hardy. Well, do you want any requirements as to able 

seamen ? 

Mr. Bour. But I will tell you, Judge Hardy, what I do think 
ought to be done. I do believe that the Government of the United 
States, or the Congress, if you please, should make it a felony for 
any able seaman to strike without proper notice. 

Mr. Hardy. That is another question. But I want to get at 
your proposition. Your proposition is simply to allow you to sail 
without any men other than certificated lifeboat men, if you see fit? 

Mr. Bour. If necessary; yes, sir. 

Mr. Mills. I would like to ask you one question. It was not so 
much the $500 fine that bothered you, but the fact that all your 
limitation of liability vanished into thin air, and had you sailed 
up to Buffalo without the required additional men, is it not a fact 
that if there had been an accident it would have meant a very serious 
loss to you? 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Congressman, I will tell you what did happen. 
We were delayed a day on account of an accident to the wheel. We 
had 400 or 500 passengers at Chicago. We had to pay their board 
and so on while Ave were delayed. We were liable. I have heard 
these gentlemen testify that the companies are not liable for any 
damage. That is wrong. 

Mr. Briggs. Do you operate passenger boats? 

Mr. Bour. Absolutely and exclusively passenger boats. 

Mr. Briggs. Which do you consider more valuable, the lives of 
the passengers and crew or the property ? 

Mr Bour. I consider the lives of the passengers- 

Mr. Briggs. And the crew ? 

Mr. Bour. The passengers and crew, the human beings; yes. 

Mr. Briggs. Of course, they are all human beings. That is what I 
expected you to say. 

Mr. Bour. Yes; I consider the lives of the passengers and the 
human beings; sure. 

Mr. Briggs. Now, I want to ask another question- 

Mr. Chindblom. I think I will have to take exception to that 
question. I do not think it is a fair question. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Bour, during the last two or three days the asser¬ 
tion has been made here that all the operating companies on the ocean 
and on the Great Lakes have dummy corporations that are used 
solely for the purpose of absorbing the insurance on the ship. I will 
ask you whether that is a fact, whether you have a dummy corpora¬ 
tion which you use for the purpose of insuring your ships ? 



456 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Congressman, I heard that remark; but so far as I 
am concerned, no. 

Mr. Bland. I do not think the statement was made with regard to 
the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Mills. The inference was raised. 

Mr. Bour. I did not hear any testimony that was given relating to 
the Great Lakes. It was on the ocean. 

Mr. Hardy. Are your ships individually incorporated ? 

Mr. Bour. No, sir; it is one corporation. The seamen’s act, as 
originally written, I think, provides that every lifeboat should be 
supplied with fresh water. Now, that is ridiculous on the Lakes. As 
I understand it, the seamen’s act, as written in London, never was 
intended to apply to the Great Lakes. We are never over 15 or 20 
miles from land of any kind. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not think this act was written in London? 

Mr. Bour. Well, the original bill was drafted, as I understand it. 

Mr. Hardy. No; they were the provisions specifying the require¬ 
ments in regard to lifeboats, etc. 

Mr. Bour. I understand that was the nucleus of the seamen’s bill. 
I may be wrong. 

Mr. Hardy. The bill was pending here before the conference at 
London for years and years. 

Mr. Bour. I do not know. 

Mr. Chindblom. I want to make a statement. This gentleman 
lives in Chicago where I come from, and if the question and answer 
are going to remain in the record, I .want to say that I consider that 
there was no occasion for asking this gentleman whether he con¬ 
sidered personal life more valuable than property. I do not like that 
question. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Chairman, that is distinctly a relative question 
in this inquiry. The gentleman from New York had asked the 
question whether or not the failure to have able seamen on board 
had not jeopardized the ship by reason of risking her limit of 
liability, etc. I said was not the question of the lives of the pas¬ 
sengers carried by that ship and the lives of the crew of even greater 
moment than the value of the property, the question being whether 
the ship ought to go without men of sufficient skill to man the life¬ 
boats in case the vessel should be in trouble. 

Mr. Chindblom. I am afraid my friend has forgotten his ques¬ 
tion. The question began, “ Do you consider the lives of passengers 
worth so and so ? ” 

Mr. Briggs. I asked him if he did not consider the lives of the 
passengers and crew worth more than the property, of more value 
than the property. That is the only question. It seems to me that 
is proper rebuttal and does not reflect on the witness at all. The 
witness said he did think so, and I said I thought he would say so. 
That is one of the first questions Mr. Scott asked, whether the able 
seamen are necessary adjuncts, and it was only bearing on that 
question. 

Now, I would like to ask the witness another question. When do 
your ships begin their season’s operation? 

Mr. Bour. At different times. This year we begin on the 26th 
day of June. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 457 

Mr. Briggs. When do you begin ordinarily? 

Mr. Bour. About that time, or the latter part of June. I am not 
interested in the season, although we have lost business by reason of 
the short season. 

Mr. Briggs. But the 62 or 72 days season is what you operate 
under existing conditions? 

Mr. Bour. Under existing conditions. 

Mr. Briggs. xVre you operating your vessels at a profit? 

Mr. Bour. My company has paid one and a half dividends. I 
mean by that that we have been operating now for seven years, and 
we paid a dividend for one and a half years. 

Mr. Briggs. Which years were those? 

Mr. Bour. That was in 1918 and 1920. 

Mr. Briggs. In other words, before the law went into effect and 
one year since, in the seven years? 

Mr. Bour. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. So that really you are not suffering any special amount 
of loss by reason of the operation of the seamen’s act, so far as the 
operation of your ships are concerned? 

Mr. Bour. "No ; all I want to do is to be able to operate and serve 
the people properly. 

Mr. Gahn. How many boats have you? 

Mr. Bour. The North American and the South American . 

Mr. Gahn. What did they cost? 

Mr. Bour. They cost at the time they were built about a million 
and a half, both of them. Of course, they are worth more money 
now. They could not be replaced under $2,000,000. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the tonnage of the vessels? 

Mr. Bour. The gross tonnage of the South American is 2.263 and 
the gross tonnage of the North American is about 2,200. They are 
passenger boats. We do not carry freight. 

Mr. Gahn. Passengers and their baggage? 

Mr. Bour. Sure; passengers and baggage. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. O’Brien would like to ask a question, if it is per¬ 
mitted. I do not know what it is. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

Mr. O’Brien. I would like to ask the witness where he shipped 
these men that got off the boat in Buffalo? Were they shipped from 
the union harbor? 

Mr. Bour. From Buffalo. 

Mr. O’Brien. Not from the union? 

Mr. Bour. Well, they were union men. I do not know where they 
came from, but they were shipped from Buffalo. 

Mr. O’Brien. If they were shipped from Buffalo they were 
Italians. 

Mr. Bour. Italians. 

Mr. O’Brien. They were not shipped from the union hall? 

Mr. Bour. I do not know. 

Mr. O’Brien. I do. 

Mr. Bour. They were able seamen, however. 

Mr. O’Brien. Those men were not even union men when they Avere 
shipped. They Avere organized afterwards. You do usually ship 
your men, although you are in Chicago, from the union hall, so you 


458 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

could get the men from Chicago if you paid their fares from Buffalo 
to Chicago. You could get the men in Chicago, union seamen. 

Mr. Bour. We like to have Americans, too, whenever we can get 
them, and men who are familiar with the boats. 

Mr. O’Brien. The crew that quit and tied up your ship, and the 
boatswain that struck your officer were Italians whom you picked 
as your crew, and they were not forced upon you by the union? 

Mr. Bour No; they were not forced upon us, but they were union 
men, and they were able seamen. 

Mr. O’Brien. They were organized afterwards? 

Mr. Bour. I do not know about that. I know they were able 
seamen when we hired them. I do not know when they were organ¬ 
ized, and I do not care anything about that. 

Mr. Hardy. They were Italians? 

Mr. Bour. Italians; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. They were not Americans? 

Mr. Bour. Not Americans. 

Mr. O’Brien. You could have gotten Americans? 

Mr. Bour. I do not know. We could not get Americans to fill our 
crew, so we had to take a few foreigners. 

Mr. Gahn. Were they citizens? 

Mr. Bour. I do not know whether they were citizens or not, but 
they were able seamen. 

Mr. Gahn. Of Italian birth? 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. O’Brien. Did they unders f and the orders of the 3fficers trans¬ 
mitted by himself ? 

Mr. Bour. I do not know about that. They would not be able 
seamen, would they, if they could not understand the orders? You 
would not issue them a card if they could not understand the orders, 
as I understand it. 

Mr. O’Brien. The reason I am asking this is because there is a 
possibility that these men were not capable of speaking and under¬ 
standing English sufficiently to understand the orders given by the 
officers. 

Mr. Mills. If they were not, what would that have to do with this 
hearing ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Well, the way I look at it, this brings out the point 
that if the law is being enforced for the safety of passengers aboard 
ships, it is absolutely essential that the men be able to understand 
the officers’ order for the launching of boats, or doing anything else 
for the safety of the ship and passengers. 

Mr. Chindblom. What about the man who struck the officer? Did 
he understand English ? 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Chairman, I think it was stated here by Mr. O’Brien 
that certain skill and ability was required to become an able seaman. 
These men that we hired were able seamen. Now, what examina¬ 
tion they had to go through I do not know. They were able seamen. 
That is all we are interested in, able seamen. 

Mr. Hardy. I would like to ask you were they Italians? 

Mr. Bour. Italians. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not know whether they were naturalized or 
not? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 459 


Mr. Bour. No. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you hire them in Chicago ? 

Mr. Bour. We hired them at Buffalo. 

Mr. Hardy. Then, when you got to a certain point these Italians 
struck, and did you go out in the yard to get able seamen somewhere 
else? 

Mr. Bour. No; they had practically finished their season. It was 
during the month of August, and at Buffalo where they struck. 

Mr. Mills. Thej^ had been with you all the season? 

Mr. Bour. They had been with us up to that time; yes, sir. 

Mr. Mu jLS. When they struck they were members of the union ? 

Mr. Bour. Able seamen. 

Mr. Hardy. He did not say they were members of the union. 

Mr. Mills. I will ask Mr. O’Brien; when they struck were they 
members of the union ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I do not know, but I do know- 

Mr. Mills. Did you not say within five minutes that they were or¬ 
ganized after they joined the ship? 

Mr. O’Brien. After this, you mean? 

Mr. Mills. Did you or did you not say within five minutes that they 
were organized after they joined? 

Mr. O’Brien. The point is this, Congressman, that I am trying to 
make, is this- 

Mr. Mills. I am not interested in the point you are trying to 
make- 

Mr. O’Brien. But I am. 

Mr. Mills. All I am interested in is having the question answered. 
It is a perfectly plain question. 

Mr. O’Brien. I am going to try and answer it, if you will allow 
me. 

Mr. Mills. Will you state whether- 

Mr. O’Brien. I said that; yes. 

Mr. Mills. Thank you. 

Mr. O’Brien. I said that the men must have been organized after 
they had joined the ship. 

Sir. Mills. You did not say must have been: you said they were 
organized. 

Mr. O’Brien. Here is the point: These men went on at Buffalo. 
They were taken by train from Buffalo to Chicago and joined the 
ship" at Muskegon or some other place, and when they were in Buffalo 
on the last trip those Italians did not feel sufficiently well disposed 
toward the vessel owner to travel to Chicago, or wherever she was 
going to be laid up, and then travel back to their homes. The proba¬ 
bilities are that these fellows wanted to stay in their homes, where 
their homes were, on the last trip, because there would only be a 
few days’ work to travel back to Chicago, where the ship was going 
to be laid up. 

Mr. Mills. They did not care what became of the vessel or its pas¬ 
sengers or whether- 

Mr. O’Brien. I grant that. Another reason why we organized 
those people is that we find that aboard ships we must organize them 
in order to protect ourselves. 



460 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Mills. Now, let me ask you this: You know all about these 
four men; you know they broke their contract and left the vessel in 
a position where she had to leave short of eight able seamen and 
one boatswain. What action did you take with reference to those 
men ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I never knew that until Mr. Bour told me himself. 

Mr. Mills. When did he tell you ? 

Mr. O’Brien. To-day. He told me about the men that had left in 
Buffalo this morning. 

Mr. Mills. Had you known, what would you have done? 

Mr. O’Brien. I could not have done anything to those men for 
this reason, that the probabilities are that we will not see those men 
again. The same condition prevails in other ships. I am sure that 
question is going to be taken up in rebuttal by Mr. Thorp. 

Mr. Tiiorp. It will be. 

Mr. Mills. Do not these shipowners need protection from just 
that kind of case ? 

Mr. O’Brien. They do, yes; certainly. 

Mr. Mills. How do you suggest meeting a situation such as this 
gentleman has described? 

Mr. O’Brien. I will tell you what we do. Of course, as I say, 
we have no control over these men, as they were quitting and going- 
home and practically leaving the Lakes. They would not pa}^ any 
attention to what we say to them. In the vast majority of cases we 
can not even talk to them. They can not understand us. I know it, 
because I have had to write out a description of those men, to give 
to the man who was on board the ships to join the men, and it was 
very difficult to find out even their proper names. 

Mr. Mills. And yet they are rated as able seamen ? 

Mr. O’Brien. Yes; they are rated. Their skill is there. 

Mr. Scott. In this particular instance, Mr. O’Brien, your organi¬ 
zation was notified of this thing when the representative of this com¬ 
pany’s ship went up to your headquarters in Buffalo and requested 
8 or 10 additional men to supplant the men who had quit, and was 
unable to get them; is not that so ? 

Mr. O’Brien. I heard Mr. Bour say that. I do not know that, 
because I was in Chicago. 

Mr. Bour. That is true. 

Mr. Gahn. What was the reason you could not get them? 

Mr. Bour. They were not to be had. Of course, we had 600 pas¬ 
sengers aboard. We could not wait indefinitely. We left there about 
an hour late. We could not get them and we proceeded. 

Mr. Gahn. Did the union in Buffalo indicate to you in any way 
that they were backing up these men that were going to quit? 

Mr. IlouR. No; nothing whatever. It was just a case of an able 
seaman who did not like to obey orders, and simply quit and took 
his men with him. 

Mr. Hardy. May I ask why it was that you sent off to get an 
Italian crew instead of trying to get an American crew where your 
boat started from? 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Congressman, I will tell you as near as I can. The 
duties of an able seaman, so far as we are concerned, and so far as 
the duties require, as given here by this gentleman, are not so much 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 11 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 461 

the being able to lower a lifeboat or raise a lifeboat, but they are 
scrubbing and cleaning. That is the duty on our ship. We have 
nothing to do but test them as to the matter of saving lives. We 
have our drills every week, and I am going to say to you that you have 
heard the testimony of these gentlemen here that it takes two men 
to man a lifeboat- 

Mr. Hardy. That is not the question I am asking now. I want 
to know if you got these Italians cheaper than you could get 
Americans ? 

Mr. Bour. No; we paid the union scale. But it does not make any 
difference about nationality. Their skill is just the same. 

Mr. Hardy. Were they union men? 

Mr. Bour. They were union men. 

Mr. Hardy. When you got them? 

Mr. Bour. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. You say you wanted men who could do scrubbing? 

Mr. Bour. Those were the requirements, so far as we were con¬ 
cerned, the principal requirements in handling the line. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know whether they could understand the 
English language? 

Mr. Bour. Yes: they seemed to understand the English language. 
I talked to a lot of them. 

Mr. Gahn. You do not want the present law changed, then, be¬ 
cause you are having any controversies with the union? 

Mr. Bour. That is all; it is a union proposition. We have men on 
our ships that are qualified to do that work. 

Mr. Gahn. Did you have any American seamen on the boat when 
these Italians struck? 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Gahn. Did they strike or did they stay with you? 

Mr. Bour. No; they did not. 

Mr. Gaiin. They sta}^ed with you? 

Mr. Bour. They stayed. They were Americans. You have heard 
here than an able seaman is an American, but the fact of the matter 
is that they are not. 

Mr. Gaiin. I wanted to know if they stayed with you. It was 
the Italians who quit and the American able seamen, so called, who 
stayed with you ? 

Mr. Bour. It was the Italians. 

Mr. Gahn. You did not have any controversy with the union when 
you shipped about these able seamen? 

Mr. Bour. No; an individual controversy with the boatswain. 

Mr. Gahn. Do you or do you not want the law changed so that you 
can get away from dealing with the unions? 

Mr. Bour: Well, it would be a great thing if we could. We could 
then run our own business. 

Mr. Hardy. If it was the union that caused them to strike, why 
did the Americans stay with you? 

Mr. Mills. He did not say it was the union. 

Mr. Hardy. I think he left that inference, it seems to me. 

Mr. Bour. Perhaps. I do not want to answer that. 

Mr. Hardy. Were these Americans members of the union? 

Mr. Bour. Yes; we are all unionized. 



462 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. So it looked like an Italian question, did it not ? 

Mr. Bo ur. It was these sailors, these able seamen. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you not have some American able seamen there ?' 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Hardy. Did they quit you ? 

Mr. Bour. No; they did not. 

Mr. Hardy. Only the Italians quit you ? 

Mr. Bour. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. Then it was an Italian question ? 

Mr. Bour. It was an Italian question. 

Mr. Hardy. Why did you leave the impression that it was the 
union that was troubling you ? 

Mr. Bour. It was. We could not sail without getting more union 
men. 

Mr. Hardy. No; there is not any law about union men. You could 
not get able seamen you said at first. 

Mr. Bour. Of course, that is an inference. You can say that as 
you wish, but the fact is, gentlemen, that we can not hire anybody 
but union men. 

Mr. Hardy. And yet you had union men right there with you ? 

Mr. Bour. We had union men. 

Mr. Hardy. And the union refused to get other men ? 

Mr. Bour. Well, they did not help us. We had to leave without a 
sufficient crew. 

Mr. Hardy. Do you know whether they could help you or not ? 

Mr. Bour. They probably would have if they had had them. 
There is no question about that. 

Mr. Hardy. You think they would have helped you if they had 
had the men? 

Mr. Bour. Absolutely. 

Mr. Hardy. You do not even expect the union to do an impossi¬ 
bility, to help you Avhen they did not have them? 

Mr. Bour. That is why I say the law should be changed. 

Mr. Hardy. So it is the law, and not the union? 

Mr. Bour. That is all. I am not opposed to the union. We like 
the union. If they were all like Mr. Conway and Mr. O’Brien, we 
would not have any trouble. 

Mr. Hardy. Were all of the men on your boat certificated lifeboat 
men? 

Mr. Bour. They were either able seamen or certificated lifeboat 
men, a certain portion of them. We carry waitresses and maids, who 
are not eligible to become certificated lifeboat men. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you have 65 per cent of the deck crew that were 
either able seamen or certificated lifeboat men ? 

Mr. Bour. Yes; we complied with the law. 

Mr. Hardy. You reported your shortage and they remitted your 
fine? 

Mr. Bour. I know what will happen the next time if we get fined. 

Mr. Briggs. How many passengers in a season do you carry ? 

Mr. Bour. We carry in the neighborhood of 15,000 or 18,000. 

Mr. Briggs. How many on a trip? 

Mr. Bour. Well, we carry 600. 

Mr. Briggs. Six hundred? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 463 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the licensed capacity of the vessel? 

Mr. Bour. Our license on the South American is 618 in addition 
to a crew of 132, and on the North American it is in the neighbor¬ 
hood of 500. 

Mr. Briggs. And the crew is how much ? 

Mr. Bour. A crew of about 130. 

Mr. Gahn. Is this the point, finally, that without any fault on the 
part of the union, without any fault on account of any labor trouble 
you had, you had to sail in order to accommodate the public, with¬ 
out the eight men, because the law would not permit you to carry 
anybody else in their places? 

Mr. Bour. Absolutely. Even the captain or licensed officer could 
not substitute as an able seaman. 

Mr. Briggs. I think you stated you only remained about an hour. 
Did you make that statement? 

Mr. Bour. Nine hours. 

Mr. Biggs. How long did you give them to supply the crew? 

Mr. Bour. Well, about an hour or an hour and a half. We did not 
know it until about an hour before leaving time. 

Mr. Briggs. That is what I say; they only had about an hour or 
an hour and a half ? 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Then you made another effort to find them ? 

Mr. Bour. Yes; we reported to the customs department that we 
were short. We knew we were violating the law. And we made an 
effort to fill the crew. 

Mr. Briggs. You did your duty the best you could to sail on sched¬ 
ule and comply with the requirements of the law ? 

Mr. Bour. Yes; but the law would never allow us to operate with¬ 
out a pilot. 

Mr. Hardy. Have not the authorities been ready to meet your 
reasonable uses when these requirements could not be complied with, 
and the fine after fine has been remitted the vessel owners because 
they tried and could not comply with the law ? 

Mr. Bour. Mr. Congressman, so far as I know, in all my ex¬ 
perience in operating vessels this is the only instance where we ever 
had to violate the law. 

Mr. Hardy. In one instance only, and you have been five years 
under the law ? 

Mr. Bour. We have been five years under the law. 

Mr. Gahn. But the law requires you to pay $500 for risking the 
life and property that might have risked if there was any danger 
on that ship? 

Mr. Bour. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. If you had stayed a little longer you might have 
gotten able seamen at Detroit, might you not? 

Mr. Bour. That is questionable, Mr. Congressman, whether we 
could or not. We do not know. 

Mr. Briggs. Of course, you did not stop; you did not disarrange 
the schedule of your vessel ? 

Mr. Bour. No. We had a cargo of passengers there, and we run 
on schedule. 


464 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Briggs. I understand; you did not disarrange the schedule, 
but kept to the schedule. 

Mr. Bour. We make train connections. We sail 142 hours out 
of 168. 

Mr. Briggs. How long did you stop at Detroit ? 

Mr. Bour. We stayed at Detroit an hour. I think we stayed just 
a little longer after we tried to get this crew and could not get them. 

Mr. Briggs. How much longer; an hour, would you say ? 

Mr. Bour. We left there perhaps 30 minutes late. 

(Whereupon the committee adjourned until Monday, May 9, 1921, 
at 10.30 o’clock a. m.) 


Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, 

Monday, May 9 , 1921. 

The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. William S. Greene 
(chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Thorp. 

FURTHER STATEMENT OF MR. H. W. THORP. 

Mr. Thorp. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, Judge Hardy, a few 
days ago, remarked that the steamboat interests had had a complete 
hearing before the passage of this act. That we admit very freely: 
and at the time that we did have our hearings we based our con¬ 
tentions on the fear of what would happen under the act, and we 
have found that our fears were absolutely realized in the practical 
operation of ships on the Great Lakes; and we have found, just as 
Mr. Manahan said, it is a labor-union proposition. 

I am here now prepared to give you figures on what the cost of 
operation has been since and to answer many of the statements made 
by the witnesses that are absolutely false. 

Mr. Hardy asked me the other day to send to the committee a 
statement of the amount of dividends paid by our company, and I 
am now prepared to give it to you for the last 10 years. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Of the Goodrich Co.? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; the Goodrich Transit Co., of Chicago. In 
1910 we paid 8 per cent; but let me say this before going on with 
the dividends: The company at that time was capitalized for $500,000, 
but we have invested, or did have invested, at that time over 
$2,000,000—capitalized for $500,000; $2,000,000 of assets, principally 
in ships. 

Mr. Hardy. What was the dividend in 1911? 

Mr. Thorp. I am coming to that. We paid 8 per cent in 1910. 

The Chairman. That is, on the capital stock? 

Mr. Thorp. On the capital stock of $500,000; yes sir; not on the in¬ 
vested capital, but on the capital stock. In 1911 we paid 7 per cent; in 
1912 we paid 8 per cent; in 1913 we increased our capitalization by 
selling $250,000 worth of preferred stock, it being necessary to get 
more money into the company to operate. In 1913 we paid 31 

per cent on the common stock of $500,000 and 34 per cent on 

the preferred stock of $250,000. In 1914 we paid 3^ per cent on 

the common stock and 7 per cent on the preferred. In 1915 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 465 


we paid no dividends to either common or preferred stockholders. 
In 1916 no dividends on either common or preferred; 1917 no divi¬ 
dends on the common or preferred. In 1918 no dividends were paid 
on the common, but 24J per cent was paid on the preferred, the pre¬ 
ferred being cumulative stock. I will add to that that in that year 
the Government took over our steamship Virginia , commandeered 
her, and from the proceeds received from the Government we paid 
the dividends that were in arrears on the preferred stock, but noth¬ 
ing on the common. 

Mr. Bankhead. Was there any guaranteed dividend in the con¬ 
tract on the preferred stock? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely; it was a 7 per cent cumulative stock. 
The same year, Avith the balance of the proceeds from the sale of 
the Virginia , the money received from the Government, the board 
of directors directed that that money be used for the retirement of 
the preferred stock. We had seven directors of the company, two 
of whom were common stockholders and five were preferred stock¬ 
holders. There were only two common stockholders in the com¬ 
pany, myself and Mr. Goodrich. We were outvoted and they re¬ 
tired, as far as the money went, the preferred stock at a premium 
of 110. That was by direction of the board of directors, five of 
whom were preferred stockholders, and Mr. Goodrich and I the two 
that represented the common stock and who were the entire owners 
of the common stock. 

In 1919 we paid 10 per cent on the common. There was no pre¬ 
ferred. The preferred was all retired before 1919. In 1920 we paid 
10 per cent on the common. So much for dividends. 

Mr. Bankhead. What did the Government pay you for your 
steamer ? 

Mr. Thorp. $250,000, as I recall it, Mr. Bankhead. They first 
allowed us $225,000 We asked for a rehearing before the Navy 
board of appraisal and it was increased about 10 per cent. The 
same case prevailed with three other steamboats that were com¬ 
mandeered at the same time—four in all. 

In 1915 the pay roll of our steamship Alabama , our finest boat, 
and the boat we operate all the year around, was $3,229.90. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that per month? 

Mr. Thorp. That was for the month of May, 1915. 

Mr. Hardy. That $3,200 pay roll was for one month ? 

Mr. Thorp. For one month; for the month of May, 1915 For the 
month of May, 1916, the pay roll was $4,612.25. Now, remember. I 
am here to substantiate every bit of this and you can put me on oath 
right now, if you want to. Every bit of my testimony you can con¬ 
sider sworn to. 

Mr. Hardy. We understand you would make the same statement. 

Mr! Thorp. This is not theory; this is actual practice—same route, 
same boat, and same service In 1917 it was $6,344.45—double what 
it was in 1915. 

Those are the onlv figures I have with me. I just happened to 
have them, but I can say each year it has increased, and quite ma¬ 
terially, until now we are paying away up to about $12,000. 

I have here something that I dug up since I came to TV ashmgton, 
with my office stamp of 1915. It shows the number of steamers we 

48420—21-30 


466 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


had at that time. It shows the additional crew, for the equipment 
that we had previous to the act, under the act would be 86 men. 

Mr. Bankhead. On what vessel? 

Mr. Thorp. That was on the seven boats that we had. This was 
the additional crew for the present equipment. That was not in the 
firehold; that was the able seamen that were necessary .to be put on 
because of the fact that we had to carry able seamen, where there¬ 
tofore we did not. 

Mr. Bankhead. It averaged about 12 men to each vessel ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. The additional crew for the equipment, to 
obtain the same passenger allowance as in 1915 was 125 men on the 
seven ships. 1 have a statement here, that w T as made up in 1914, 
shoAving the number of boats and rafts carried on our steamer Chris¬ 
topher Columbus. We at that time carried 18 small boats and 8 
rafts. This Avas previous to the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. What year? 

Mr. Thorp. My stamp date on that is 1914. 

Mr. Bankhead. Eighteen boats and hoAV many rafts ? 

Mr. Thorp. And eight rafts—all carried on the upper deck of the 
ship, and the total Aveight of the boats, rafts, and daAuts Avas 53.470 
pounds. That Avas considerable weight, and -it Avas Avay up in the 
air. 

The other day, or at several times during this hearing, they haAT? 
talked about the shipowners dodging responsibility. I want to read 
something about the creAvs. I Avant to read you some extracts from 
a letter I Avrote to Senator Burton, December 31, 1912—10 years ago. 
At that time Senator Burton Avas chairman of the subcommittee of 
the Committee on Commerce of the United States Senate. This Avas 
following the hearing before which I appeared. I gave the time of 
leaving on tAvo of our particular runs, which I will read into the 
record. On our Chicago and Mihvaukee run— 

On the day run the Columbus leaves Chicago 9.30 a. m. The wheelsman on 
Avatch when she leaves goes off watch at noon. The man that relieves him is 
on watch at the wheel until the seamer docks at Milwaukee, A\Tiicli is 2.30 
o’clock p. m. The same man takes her out of Milwaukee 4.30 p. m., and is 
relieved at supper time by man that went off watch at noon- 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. When you say supper time, you mean 6 o’clock ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; that is 6 o’clock. 

* * * And this man is at the A\ T heel until the steamer docks at Chicago, 

9.30 p. m. You can see that the entire time in each 24 hours spent by each man 
at the wheel does not exceed five hours. 

On the night run, Chicago to Milwaukee: In the summer time steamer leaves 
either end of route 9 p. m„ stopping at Racine both north and south bound. The 
Avheelsman on \A T atch at time of leaving is relieved at midnight. If steamer is 
northbound, between 1.30 and 2 a. m., stop is made at Racine, time in port 
averaging about one hour. The run. Racine to Milwaukee, about two hours, 
the steamer remaining from 12 to 15 hours both at Chicago and Milwaukee, 
leaving about 7 hours’ watch of the 24 at the wheel, and the time is divided 
between the tAvo Avheelsmen. 

Mr. Hardy. This is all a neAv line of testimony you are putting in 
now. You did not say anything about that in your original examina¬ 
tion. 

Mr. Thorp. I understood the committee Avanted all the light on 
the subject they could get. 

Mr. Hardy. It might be the other side would want to traverse that 
Avhole matter. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 467 

Mr. Tiiorp. You can strike it all out if you wish. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not wish to strike it out, but I want both sides to 
be heard on everything. 

Mr. 1 iiorp. I started to read something else, and this was in the 
letter. 

Mr. Hardy. 1 his brings in a lot of new matter that the other 
parties have not discussed. 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, yes; it has all been discussed by both sides; I beg 
to differ with you on that. 

Mr. Hardy. They have not discussed this statement of yours. 

Mr. Thorp. They have discussed the wages. 

Mr. Hardy. But this is an entirely new statement. 

Mr. Thorp. \ou may strike it out if it is going to prolong this 
hearing. 

Mr. Hardy. I only want both sides to be heard on every question. 

Mr. Thorp. I say it can be struck out if it is going to prolong the 
hearing. 

Mr. Furuseth. That is not for you to say. 

Mr. Tiiorp. Mr. Chairman, I object to being interrupted by Mr. 
Furuseth. 

Mr. Hardy. Just let me say what I want to say about that. I do 
say that this is matter that was not brought out in the beginning. 

Mr. Thorp. And I do say it can be struck out if it is going to pro¬ 
long the hearing. 

Mr. Hardy. It will be for the committee to decide whether we want 
it struck out or whether we want to hear from the other side. 

Mr. Thorp (reading) : 

Since returning from Washington have discussed with Mr. Goodrich, president 
of this company, many of the matters that were brought out at the hearing. 
Mr. Goodrich believes that in order to safeguard the lives of passengers and 
crews on steam vessels operating under United States laws Congress should 
enact legis’afon that will materially assist the managers of steamship lines to, 
maintain first-class discipline. 

My reason for bringing that in at this time is I am going to show 
you that discipline is not maintained and can not be maintained 
under this present law. 

Mr. Hardy. Is there anything in this bill about discipline? 

Mr. Thorp. It is information I am giving the committee now. 

Mr. Hardy. But is it on the bill? 

Mr. Thorp. It is information. I understood you want all the in¬ 
formation you can get. 

Mr. Hardy. Go ahead. 

Mr. Thorp (reading) : 

Every member of the crew, with the exception of women employed as steward¬ 
esses, etc., should he able to assist in lowering lifeboats, also be able to row, 
and in the event of disaster to assist passengers, instead of, through lack of 
drill, be nothing more or less than just so many additional passengers. 

Understand, this was written to Senator Burton in 1912, before the 
bill went into effect. And that is done by one of these people who are 
so much against safety at sea. Continuing: 

The shipowner or operator must have the help of the Government laws before 
the full efficiency of crews will be obtained, no matter the wage or number of 
crew, and hope that this will come to pass. 


468 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

Mr. Chindblom is not here, but he will bear me out in this. I want 
to go back to one of these statements that was made. A certain place 
on the Great Lakes has been designated here as the graveyard of the 
Great Lakes. I want to tell you gentlemen that in practically every 
district on the Great Lakes there is a place known as the graveyard 
of the Great Lakes. At Sturgeon Bay, Wi§'., particularly where we 
operate steamers, there is a place known as the graveyard of the Great 
Lakes. It is given that name because of the fact there is a concern 
there that buys up every old steamboat they can get hold of, puts them 
either in its stone trade—rebuilds them—or wrecks them. And there 
are scattered along that beach many, many ships of different kinds, 
and it is known as the graveyard of the Great Lakes. And that i§ 
how some of these places get their names. 

We were on the matter of safety. They testified here about five 
coast guard stations being in a certain district. I want to tell you 
now I live within a mile and a half of a little coast guard station at 
Groves Point, 12 miles north of Chicago. There is a coast guard sta¬ 
tion there, Government operated; there is a coast guard station at 
the harbor entrance at Chicago; there is a coast guard station at 
Jackson Park, about 7 miles south of Chicago, and there is another 
coast guard station farther south, or about 12 miles south of Chicago. 
So that within 24 miles, at Chicago, there are four coast guard sta¬ 
tions. Mr. Chindblom will bear me out on this. 

When you had your radio hearings I was in communication with 
Congressman Chindblom, who, by the way, represents the district in 
which I vote. He wired me about a number of things and we dis¬ 
tinctly said—and we have fought for this for years, gentlemen—that 
if you want to make for safety on the Great Lakes equip your coast 
guard station with your wireless. We have hammered that and ham¬ 
mered it at your committee and everybody else, and this is not any¬ 
thing new. And we are talking about something concrete for safety. 

The other day there was considerable said about Canadian registry 
and how easy it was to get the Canadian Government to take a boat 
or certificate a boat that had American registry. That is absolutely 
untrue. Our own company within the last 60 days had a customer 
for a tug we owned, located at Manitowas, the tug Arctic. She was 
inspected by the Canadians, who wanted to buy the tug, but because of 
the fact the inspection laws of Canada are so rigid and that her boiler 
allowance, the steam pressure, would be so reduced that they could 
not use her in the trade they wanted to, we lost the sale of that tug. 
Now, this is all true, and I am not guessing at any of these things at 
all. 

Now, about competition. There was nobody here to refute these 
statements about the competition between the Canadian ships and 
the American ships on the Great Lakes—the passenger lines I am 
talking about now. Detroit and Windsor are on either side of the 
Detroit River, one in Canada and the other in the United States. 
The Canadian boats advertise in the Detroit papers and throughout 
the West, and they come down and make rates from Windsor. Peo¬ 
ple go over from Detroit and take that boat in Canada—American 
people do. The same thing prevails at Port Huron. On one side is 
Sarnia; on the other side is Port Huron. This Canadian ship can 
not take passengers from one American port to another, but she can 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 


13, ANI) 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


469 


ta ke them from right across the river at a very much lower rate than 
1Tlei ' lca n ship can make, and they do take them from there up 
to JJuluth. bo that they are competing. And they are very, very 
strong competitors. 

The same thing used to prevail— I do not know whether it does 
now up at \ ancouver. 5 ou could take a boat right across the bay 
and pay the charge for taking you from the American port into 
C anada and get a better rate to San Francisco, from the Canadian 
port, than you could from the American port to San Francisco on 
the same ship. 

These are absolute facts; everything I say can be substantiated. 
It is not guesswork at all. 

I he other day Mr. Hardy gave us a little history of what hap¬ 
pened before the seaman’s bill was enacted and how it was handled. 
I am going to read to you from the New York Sun of November 18. 
1915, a letter from Senator Galliimer: 

c"' 


L udei (lute of November 10, I noticed in the Sun that Ass’stant Secretary of 
the Treasury Malburn comes to the rescue of the La Follette bill, charging that 
the Republicans allowed the conference report to pass without protest. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is the report was agreed 
to by the Senate under circumstances that are not at all creditable to its pro¬ 
moters. 


On the day it passed Senator La Follette had his desk piled with papers 
for the purpose, as was stated, of speaking on the report, and Senator Hoke 
Smith, of Georgia; Senator Weeks, of Massachusetts; and other Senators, of 
whom I was one, signified our purpose of speaking against it. 

It was understood that Senator La Follette would follow the Senator who 
had the floor at a certain hour, at which time Senator Smith went to his com¬ 
mittee room to get some papers bearing on the subject. I was called to the 
Marble Room to meet a friend and Senator Weeks was engaged when the bill 
was snapped through without any one of those who were to oppose it having 
the least idea that such a procedure was in contemplation. 

I was absent from the Chamber not over 10 minutes, and Senator Smith 
returned about the same time I did. I never was more surprised in my life 
than I was to learn that the report had been adopted during my absence. The 
Congressional Record will show that Senator Smith entered a protest the next 
day and moved a reconsideration of the vote, which motion was defeated, as I 
remember, by a bare majority. 

My candid opinion is that if the measure had not been rushed through as it 
was the conference report would have been defeated ; but, however that may 
be, Assistant Secretary Malburn would better make careful inquiry before 
charging the responsibility of its passage upon the opponents of the measure. 

In addition to this, to my knowledge certain Senators voted for the adoption 
of the conference report upon the ground that they had received assurances that 
the bill would be vetoed by the President. The precise nature of the assurances 
that they received I am unable to state, but that that argument was used as a 
reason why the report might be safely agreed to is beyond doubt; but, as has 
usually happened during this administration, the assurances that had been 
given that the President would exercise his veto came to naught. 

It was a bad job, and the miserable legislation either ought to he amended 
in important particulars or repealed outright at the first opportunity. 


J. H. Gallinger. 

Concord, N. H., November 15. 

Mr. Hardy. Let me call your attention to the fact that in my state¬ 
ment I said absolutely nothing about what took place on the floor of 
the Senate. I only referred to the committee report. 

Mr. Thorp. It was referred to. about how it had been handled, 
and there is Senator Gallinger’s statement. 


470 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. But it has been stated in evidence that on a motion to 
reconsider about two-thirds, or a big majority, voted against the 
motion. 

Mr. Thorp. There is Senator Gallinger’s letter. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not know anything about .that, and Senator 
Gallinger don’t know, either, from his letter. 

Mr. Thorp. He is not here, of course. 

Mr. Hardy. I say his letter; I am taking his letter. 

Mr. Briggs. You have the record, anyway. 

Mr. Hardy. Yes; the record will show what was done. 

Mr. Thorp. I am going to read to you now some of the things that 
have happened on the Great Lakes with our own company. The 
water tenders, oilers, and firemen’s union and the seamen’s union, on 
July 29, 1918, were on the verge of striking for a raise from $85 per 
month to $100 per month. It was only through the efforts of the 
Shipping Board that the men did not go out. As a matter of fact, 
due to delay in telegrams reaching union headquarters in Chicago 
that adjustment had been made, the seamen’s union and the oilers, 
water tenders, and firemen on every passenger boat in Chicago did 
walk out. 

Mr. Hardy. I call attention to the fact this is not in rebuttal of 
anything, but is new matter being brought out. The gentleman dis¬ 
cussed the union, and discussed it at great length, in his original tes¬ 
timony. That has been replied to, and this is certainly new matter 
being brought in. 

Mr. Thorp. This is information for the committee, and I shall 
insist upon it being heard. 

Mr. Hardy. I want it heard, but I want the other side to have an 
opportunity to be heard if necessary, or if they desire it. 

Mr. Thorp. As I said, due to a delay in telegrams reaching union 
headquarters in Chicago that adjustment had been made, the sea¬ 
men’s union and the oilers, water tenders, and firemen on every pas¬ 
senger boat in Chicago did walk out, and many passenger steamers, 
with large numbers of passengers aboard, were delayed in leaving 
Chicago from one to three hours. At one time in 1918 the largest 
passenger line on Lake Erie did not turn a wheel for three days, in 
the busy passenger season, on account of the walkout of the firemen 
find seamen. 

There were also statements made here by the witnesses bearing 
on the patriotism of their men and their union. Their pay during 
the war was much greater than it ever had been, and what happened: 

On a steamer that went into the submarine zone, nothing more or less than they 
must be paid a bonus. Think of that for patriotism. Did you ever hear of our 
soldiers or sailors demanding extra compensation because they had to pass 
through the submarine zone? Did they not take the same chance as the crews 
of the ships that they were on, and how about the soldiers in the front-line 
trenches and those called upon to go “over the top”? Did they demand extra 
or more pay? Well, hardly. The crews of the ships that were in overseas 
service should he given all the credit they deserve for helping win the war, but 
that part relating to the bonuses is far from creditable and will be a blot on 
their record for all time. 

And they became ashamed of it finally, one organization did, and 
decided they would no longer require the bonus. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 471 

J will read you a letter now that 1 wrote to Hon. William B. 
\\ llson, Secretary of Labor: 

Chicago, August 17, 1916 . 

Sir : e desire to call your attention to the situation that confronts steam- 
shop owners, especially passenger steamship owners, on the Great Lakes: 

On Saturday, May 20, at 8.30 in the morning, without a moment’s warning, 
e\eiy wheelsman, lookout man, watchman, oiler, fireman, and coal passer em¬ 
ployed on the passenger steamers at this port walked out. Two steamers of 
this line were held up until late at night and one from about 3 p.-m. until late 
at night. Only in a roundabout way were we able to learn the reason for their 
action. Every effort was made to get in communication with the officials of 
the labor organizations, but it was after 12 noon before we could reach them. 
An appointment was made for a conference at 2.45 p. m., but it was a little 
after 3 p. m. before the parties reached this, office. Conference lasted until 
about 5 p. m., when the unions’ representatives left with our proposition (copy 
herewith, marked “Exhibit A”). This was to be considered without delay 
and an answer given us promptly, but we did not hear from them until almost 
9 o’clock. 

This company had three steamers in port, two loaded and ready to leave, one 
with in the neighborhood of 100 passengers aboard. The leaving time of this 
steamer is 7.45 p. m. She finally got away at 9.59. The other steamer, that was 
loaded, was due to leave at 7 p. m., got away at 10.44 p. m. 

The unions turned down our proposition (Exhibit A), and it was not until 
we signed the agreement presented by them (copy, Exhibit B, herewith) that 
we could move a steamer. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Chairman, I believe I will object to this as not 
being pertinent to the bill at all, unless the gentleman wants to sug¬ 
gest we put some amendment in the bill to prevent strikes. 

Mr. Thorp. Mr. Hardy has said throughout this hearing, not only 
to our side but to the other side, that the committee wanted to 
get all the information they could, and I believe this is information 
the committee should have. 

Mr. Hardy. I am not so particular about it except this is new 
matter being brought in on the question of strikes and the other 
side will want to be heard and it will take up to-day and to-morrow. 

Mr. Thorp. We have been asked by you and the committee to show 
what effect the bill had on the Great Lakes, and we are showing it. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you not go into that? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; I diet not. 

Mr. Hardy. I think you showed, at length, the psychological ef¬ 
fect at least was to encourage strikes. 

Mr. Thorp. I am showing you what it did do. 

Mr. Hardy Did you not go over that whole matter when you were 
on the stand before? 

Mr. Thorp. I did not show you what it did do; no, sir; and I 
have heard you ask many of the witnesses here since to show some¬ 
thing it did do and I am going to show you what it did do. 

Mr. Hardy. And now in closing the testimony you bring in a lot 
of new matter. 

Mr. Thorp. I have found something I did not know I had with me. 

Mr. Gahn. We decided Saturday we would not follow court pro¬ 
cedure, but would give both sides all the opportunity they wanted, 
provided they limited the hearings to a reasonable time. 

Mr. Hardy. I will withdraw the objection, but it seems to me we 
are going outside of the bill, and it will just unduly prolong the 
hearing. 


472 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Thorp. I will finish to-day, gentlemen, if I am given a chance 
to do it. 

You will note, from our proposition (Exhibit A), that we were ready to pay 
the wage scale, take back the men that had walked out, and make no discrimi¬ 
nation against the members of their organizations in filling positions on 
steamers that were yet to go into commission. This, however, did not satisfy 
them. They insisted that the able seamen necessary under the seamen’s act 
must be members of tlieir organization. 

That is one of the things I want to show you. 

The men that we have engaged as able seamen, outside of the petty officers, 
we had contracted with for the season at $50 per month. The men were per¬ 
fectly satisfied and not one of them walked out. 

Our objection was to including men that were not members of their organi¬ 
zations and who were not involved in the walkout. 

The original of Exhibit B was dictated by Mr. Victor Olander, international 
secretary of the seamen’s union, and in typewritten form submitted to us 
for our signature, and this agreement we were forced to sign before we could 
move any one of our steamers at Chicago. We signed this in good faith and 
have kept faith since, never once having had a complaint, nor have we ever 
been once asked to meet a committee from any organization interested. 

And the date of that agreement was previous to the walkout. 

We went along feeling that we were being protected for the season of 1916, as 
stated, and at least until the matter of fall wages would be up for considera¬ 
tion. Much to our surprise, however, on Tuesday, August 8, we were informed 
that delegates from the seamen's union and the marine oilers’, water tenders', 
and firemen’s union had notified the members of tlieir organizations employed 
by this company that their wages from August 7, the day previous, would be 
$10 more per month than in the past. This affected 221 men, or an increase 
of $2,210 per month to our operating expenses, without any possibility of our 
being able to do anything in the way of increasing our earnings to offset this un¬ 
looked for increase. 

As soon as we became aware that the men had been notified by the unions 
of the increase, we called up the officials of the unions and asked what it 
meant, as we considered we had an agreement covering the season which was 
not yet over. We were then told that the committee would meet with us for a 
discussion of the matter, and a meeting was finally arranged for the following 
day. 

Understand, the delegates of the unions had already notified the men that they 
would receive the increase. The unions’ officials, however, did not come near 
the officials of this company. 

During the conversation, after we had gotten together Mr. Olander 
was taken to task for not keeping his word in connection with the 
agreement of May 20. He became incensed, and although we agreed 
to the increase, called out all quartermasters, lookoutsmen, watchmen, 
oilers, water tenders, firemen, and coal passers on our steamship 
Alabama and our steamship Indiana , the two steamers we had in 
port at the time. Mr. Olander and the other union representatives 
were finally prevailed upon to come back to our office, and, after a 
lengthy conversation, the men called out were allowed to return to 
work. 

The fight between the unions and the organization known as the 
Lake Carriers’ Association (the passenger lines do not belong to this 
association) should not be used as a club over the passenger lines. 
We are subject to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com¬ 
mission, making it impossible to increase our rates at any time with¬ 
out giving 30 days’ notice; then, too, we are in close competition with 
the railroads in our territory and can not raise our rates unless the 
railroads do. So we have no means of offsetting the increased oper- 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 473 

flting expense brought about by the seamen's act, which is giving the 
labor unions power to force the payment of a wage scale all out of 
proportion to earnings. The bulk or coarse freighters are able to 
secure carrying rates based upon the supply and demand. They 
have no tariffs. Their business this year has been so good that they 
can afford to pay high wages. 

It is said that the unions are now voting on a still greater increase 
for fall. Just why the wages should be further raised or why fall 
wages should be higher than in any other season we fail to see. If 
anything, the work is easier to perform at this season of the year. 

The unions are taking full advantage of the power given them by the seamen’s 
act to kill off the commerce of the Great Lakes. This is being done as fast as 
possible. We no longer control our properties. The class of help never was 
so poor as this year. The Government tells us how many men we shall employ 
and what their supposed qualifications shall be. This has given the unions the 
opportunity they have been longing for. The men are not better off, as a matter 
of fact—just have more to spend for drink. The increased crews make in¬ 
creased troubles for the licensed officers. There are that many more irrespon¬ 
sible men to deal with. The percentage of troubles has increased more than the 
number of employees are increased, for under present conditions the licensed 
officers have to deal with a general demoralization of their crews. The whole 
matter has gone from bad to worse, and the end is not yet in sight. 

It is earnestly hoped that if any Government official has any influence with 
the labor organizations that they will point out to the organizations the great 
difference there is between the bulk carrier and the package freight and pas¬ 
senger carrier in so far as earnings are concerned, and that such officials will 
use their influence in attempting to place the wages on a more equitable basis. 

That was the letter to Mr. Wilson. The agreement that we had— 
the men went out on May 20—this is very important, gentlemen, 
regardless of any new issue; there is no new issue; the issues are just 
the same. Here is a letter I. wrote, Exhibit B, to the lake seamen’s 
union, marine firemen, oilers, and water tenders’ union, May 20, 1916: 

We hereby agree to pay a minimum scale of $60 per month to all men 
employed on our vessels in the following capacities: Quartermasters, lookouts- 
men, watchmen, able seamen, firemen, oilers, water tenders; to coal passers, $35 
per month. We further agree to employ members of your organizations in the 
above-mentioned capacities; this agreement to cover the season of 1916. With 
the further understanding that we are to meet with committee representing 
your organizations to consider the matter of a fall wage scale and such other 
questions as you desire to bring before us. 

That was dictated at the instance of Mr. Olander. Here is my 
letter to Mr. Olander: 

Confirming conversation at this office this Saturday afternoon, May 20, this 
company agrees that it will pay the following employees, wheelsmen, lookouts- 
men. watchmen, water tenders, oilers, and firemen, at the rate of $60 per month. 

That this rate will be paid to men occupying these positions on the steamers 
that go into commission after this date, and that there will be no discrimination 
against members of your organization in filling the positions on these steamers 
that are yet to go into commission. 

Not being advised or aware that employees carried in other than the before- 
mentioned positions were to be considered at this conference, I am not in a 
position to take this matter up for settlement, but will be pleased to take the 
matter up Monday, May 22 at any hour that will suit your convenience. 

That was in 1916. I will read from the agreement this year. Here 
is an agreement with one of the organizations not represented here, 
but affiliated with those that are. It is dated April 13, 1921: 

It is also agreed between the Goodrich Transit Co. and the Marine Cooks and 
Stewards’ Union of the Great Lakes that members of the steward’s department 


474 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

will be requested to become members of the Marine Cooks and Stewards’ Union 
after a trial of one week, if during which period it is found that the service of 
the man or men are entirely satisfactory to the Goodrich Transit Co. 

They allow us to take nonunion men, but they must agree that they 
wlli become members within a week. 

There was a very, very unusual statement made here the other day 
by one of the witnesses, charging the steamboat owners with murder 
and being thieves—absolute murder—the most outrageous statement 
I ever heard made in my life. Either the man who made that state¬ 
ment knows nothing whatever of the conditions or he is making a 
willful misstatement, that he can not in any way, shape, or manner 
verify or substantiate. He said, as you will recall, that people owning 
•ships insured them and sent them to sea in a condition where the 
crews were lost and the owner collected the insurance money; that 
subsidiary companies were organized and each ship put into a sepa¬ 
rate company. Gentlemen, I do not believe that any such thing ever 
existed on the Great Lakes in any company. I do not think there is 
a company on the Great Lakes that has ever done any such thing as 
that. Now, he makes a broad statement. 

We own six ships; we have had as many as 10. They have always 
been under one ownership, absolutely. I want to inject something 
into the record of this insurance question that perhaps you people 
are not acquainted with. Evidently the other side are not. I will 
go back to the steel company’s custom—they do not carry any insur¬ 
ance at all. They are insurers for their own ships; they do not carry 
them in any old-line companies nor London Lloyd’s. They can 
afford to lose a boat each year and it would not offset the premiums 
they pay. The premiums would be greater than the value of the 
ship, and they do not insure at all. 

Mr. Haedy. You are talking about- 

Mr. Thorp. The LTnited States Steel Corporation, the Pittsburgh 
Steamship Co. 

Mr. Hardy. They have a great many ships. 

Mr. Thorp. They have 98 ships themselves this year. This is what 
happens on the passenger boats. These men do not know what they 
are talking about. I have been in this business for 38 years, and I 
have been all through the mill. I own practically one-third of the 
company I am here representing, and I own it outright. I am not 
sent down here, being paid by somebody else, talking against this 
bill; I am talking for my own property absolutely. 

Now, this is what happens: We attempt, just as far as we can, to 
hammer what is known as the insured valuation down to just as low 
a point as possible. In every policy there is an insured valuation. 
It says right in the policy how much the valuation of that ship is to 
be. We then carry insurance up to the maximum amount of that 
insured value. If we have a total loss, we lose. We gamble against 
that. And we have had total losses, too, and lost,. But on partial 
losses, any loss up to a total loss, the insurance company pays us in 
full; in some cases absolutely in full, and in some cases there is a 
small deductible average of not over $500. And they pay us the total 
amount of that partial loss, and it is the partial losses that hit the in¬ 
surance companies. So that in having the insured value 50 per cent 
of our actual value—and we insure to our insured value— we are 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 475 


carrying no hazard at all. No loss falls on us unless it is a total 
loss or above the insured valuation. 

Now, I want to tell you gentlemen that the last year the insurance 
companies themselves insisted on many of the boats on the Great 
Lakes carrying more insurance—absolute^ insisted upon it. That 
can be proven absolutely. They said, “ You have a greater valuation 
there, an increased valuation. Your valuations have gone up, so your 
ships are worth more per ton, and, we want more premiums for in¬ 
suring them. And they arbitrarily raised the value per ton and they 
always establish a value per ton. Talking about trying to get out of 
carrying insurance, we are made to carry more insurance. I am tell¬ 
ing you they do not know what they are talking about. It takes a 
man who is in the game; he has to pay the bills and he knows. 

Mr. Scott. Do you intend to cover the feature brought out by 
representatives of the labor organization that their work is extremely 
hazardous and they are unable to get insurance except at a high rate? 
Do you intend to cover that? 

Mr. Thorp. I will answer the question now by saying our com¬ 
pany carries insurance and operates boats the year around—we 
carry insurance for 365 days. We have hull insurance, cargo in¬ 
surance, and protection of indemnity. 

Mr. Bankhead. With reference to the rate for life insurance, in 
the event those men wanted to insure their lives—that is what Mr. 
Scott had in mind. 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know anything about that at all; I do not 
know anything about what the insurance rates are on the individual. 

Mr. Scott. Don’t you insure your men on your ships? 

Mr. Thorp. Our protection indemnity covers that and that covers 
collisions as well as many things besides and we are protected against 
loss. In 40 years we have not lost a passenger by disaster and not 
one member of the crew by disaster—in over 40 years. In 1917, 1 
think it is, we did have 1 man killed in accident and 16 passengers. 
It was not a marine disaster at all. It happened on the Milwaukee 
River. The boat was being towed down with a tug at either end, and 
had to be turned—winded as we call it—at the forks of the river. 
And in swinging around she struck a steel structure, a water tank 
attached to a building, and in doing that its underpinning gave way 
and this tank came over and hit the ship and there were 16 lives lost. 

Mr. Gahx. What was the name of that boat? 

Mr. Thorp. The Christopher Columbus. That was not anything 
for which we were to blame. A similar accident occurred this last 
year, where this boat swung across—by the way, this boat was 14 
inches from the edge of the dock—and as she swung around, she 
had a spoon-shaped bow, and she struck this structure and this water 
tank came down. 

Mr. Bankhead. Whose negligence was the cause of that acci¬ 
dent ? 

Mr. Thorp. That has not been determined. The reason for that is 
our company, or the insurance company, libeled the tug, and I do 
not think it has ever gone through to see whether the tug was liable 
or not. These people who were killed and injured were paid out of 
our indemnity insurance. The procedure is very much along the 
line of the procedure testified to here the other day, and I will give 


476 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

von the history of that case—it won't take long—and how it does 
work out sometimes. YTe immediately petitioned for limit of lia¬ 
bility in the United States court, and that petition was granted by 
the judge. The judge then appointed appraisers to appraise the 
ship in her then present condition, and she was appraised at a value 
considerably above the insurance we carry. When the appraisement 
is O. K’d bv the judge, the next procedure is to advertise. They sent 
out what they call a monition, and in that they called upon anyone 
who has a claim against that ship to make their claim. 

The claims amounted, gentlemen, to about $300,000 to $350,000, 
and we were carrying $100,000 protection of indemnity insurance. 
Not one of those cases ever went into court; they were satisfied in 
open court from the insurance we had, and all of it was turned over 
to those people. Most of the claimants put their claims in the hands 
of the same lawyers; there were very few lawyers interested in the 
claimants’ side, and we had only one, and between them they fixed 
the thing up and we sent a check to the court. 

A great deal was said the other day, or “ Two Years Before the 
Mast ” was quoted. I suppose the man who quoted it did not think 
anybody else had ever read it. I happened to have read the story.. 
I have it here, and I want to quote from that book. To begin with, 
this is a narrative of the sea. It is a diary based on actual facts of 
Richard Henry Dana. It happened many, many years ago. 

As to Richard Henry Dana, jr., the author of this book, the reader 
may wish to know something. He came back from his two years’ 
trip in 1836, “ in a state of intellectual famine, to books and study and 
intercourse with educated men.*' He had left his class at Harvard 
at the end of the sophomore year (1833) on account of the trouble 
with his eyes, and sailed about a year later. 

That is the beginning of Richard Henry Dana. I Avant to read you 
something that happened. This ship left Boston : 

As she was to get under way early in the afternoon, I made my appearance 
on board at 12 o’clock, in fill] sea r g, with my chest, containing an outfit for 
a two or three years’ voyage, which I had undertaken from a determination 
to cure, if possible, by an entire change of life, and by a long absence from 
books, with a plenty of hard work, plain food, and open air, a weakness of the 
eyes, which had obliged me to give up my studies, and which no medical aid 
seemed likely to remedy. 

The change from the tight frock coat, silk cap, and kid gloves of an under¬ 
graduate at Chicago to the loose duck trousers, checkered shirt, and tarpaulin 
liat of a sailor, though somewhat of a transformation, was soon made; and I 
supposed that I should pass very well for a jack tar. But it is impossible to 
deceive the practiced eye in these matters; and while I thought myself to be 
looking as salt as Neptune himself, I was, no doubt, known for a landsman 
by everyone on board as soon as I hove in sight. A sailor has a peculiar cut 
to his clothes and a way of wearing them which a green hand can never get. 
The trousers, tight around the hips and thence hanging long and loose around 
the feet, a superabundance of checkered shirt, a low-crowned, well varnished 
black hat, worn on the back of the head, with half a fathom of black ribbon 
hanging over the left eye, and a slip tie to the black neckerchief, with some 
of the other minutiae, are signs the want of which betrays the beginner at 
once. Besides the points in my dress which were out of the way, doubtless 
my complexion and hands were quite enough to distinguish me from the 
regular salt who, with a sunburned cheek, wide step, and rolling gate, swings 
his bronzed and toughened hands athwartships, half opened, as though just 
ready to grasp a rope. 

With all my imperfections on my head I joined the crew, and we hauled 
out into the stream and came to anchor for the night. The next day we were 
employed in preparation for sea, reeving studding sail agear, across royal yards, 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 477 


putting on chafing gear, and taking on board our powder. On the following 
nigln 1 stood my first watch. I remained awake nearly all the first part of 
the night from fear that I might not hear when I was called. And when I 
went on deck so great were my ideas of the importance of my trust that I 
walked regularly fore and aft the whole length of the vessel, looking out over 
the hows and taff rail at each turn, and was not a little surprised at the cool¬ 
ness of the old seaman whom I called to take my place, in stowing himself 
snugly away under the longboat for a nap. That was a sufficient lookout, he 
thought, for a fine night, at anchor in a safe harbor. 

Wednesday, November 5 (same year, a round. Cape Horn)- 

-Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Chairman, I want this witness to have every 
possible latitude in answering the other side, but reading from a 
diary in 1837 I do not think tends to throw much light on this 
controversy. 

Mr. Thorp. I want to call your attention to the fact one of the 
witnesses quoted this book. I would not have brought this book 
into the thing if it had not been quoted, and from this book I 
intend to show you how much skill it needs to become proficient in 
handling a boat. 

Mr. Bankhead. I leave it to the discretion of the chairman: T have 
no objection to it. 

Mr. T horp. It won’t take me 5 minutes. It was quoted from by 
the other side. 

“Here comes Cape Horn.” said the chief mate; and we had hardly time to 
haul down and clew up before it was upon us. In a few minutes a heavier sea 
was raised than I had ever seen, and it was directly ahead, the little brig, 
which was no better than a bathing machine, plunged into it and all the 
forward part of her was under water, the sea pouring in through the bow 
ports and hawse holes and over the knightheads, threatening to wash every¬ 
thing overboard. In the lee scuppers it was up to a man’s waist. We sprang 
aloft and double-reefed the topsails and furled the other sails and made all 
snug. Hut this would not do; the brig was laboring and straining against the 
head sea and the gale was growing worse and worse. At the same time sleet 
and hail were driving with all fury against us. We clewed down and hauled 
out the reef tackles again, and close-reefed the fore topsail and furled the 
main and hove her to on the starboard tack. Here was an end to our fine 
prospects. We made up our minds to head winds and cold weather, sent down 
the royal yards, and unrove the gear. 

This night (this is Thursday, Nov. 6) it was my turn to steer, or, as the 
sailors say, my trick at the helm, for two hours. Inexperienced as I was, I 
made out to steer to the satisfaction of the officer, and neither Stimson nor I 
gave up our tricks all the time that we were off the cape. This was something 
to boast of, for it requires a good deal of skill and watchfulness to steer a 
vessel close hauled in a gale of wind against a heavy head sea. “ Ease her when 
she pitches ” is the word, and a little carelessness in letting her ship a heavy 
sea might sweep the decks or take a mast out of her. 

This man steered that ship around Cape Horn in less than three 
months from the time he left Boston. 

Mr. Hardy. It is harder to steer the ship when it is running than 
when it is just under a wind, is it not ? 

Mr. Thorp. Sir? 

Mr. Hardy. It is harder to steer the ship when it is running in 
difficult seas? 

Mr. Thorp. Why, certainly it is. 

In reading the story of this Harvard College undergraduate’s 
experience, one should bear in mind, to appreciate the dangers of 
his rounding the cape, that the brig Pilgrim was only 180 tons bur¬ 
den and 86 feet and 6 inches long, shorter on the water line than many 
of our summer sailing sloops and schooner yachts. 



478 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

And he steered that ship around, a man who had never been aboard 
a ship before in his life, so that you can have an idea how much time 
it takes and how much skill it takes for a man to handle a ship in a 
gale of wind off Cape Horn. 

Our company was accused of having Italian sailors, at least on 
some of its boats. I plead guilty; we have Italian sailors. The Italian 
sailors have the United States able seamen’s certificates and United 
States certificated lifeboat men’s certificates. The Italian sailors are 
members of the organization represented by some of the witnesses 
and pay dues to their organization and have always done so, so far as 
I know. 

Mr. Chindblom. Italy is something of a seafaring nation, is it not ? 
My recollection is that Italy is pretty nearly surrounded by water. 

Mr. Thorp. I will say this, with all due respect to the American, 
that if you can find anybody who knows more about it than the 
Italians I would be glad to see them. And we would not be carrying 
Italian sailors if we could get other men or it was not for the fact that 
the men, for the greater part, who belong to the unions, have not the 
skill they talk about, have not the sobriety and do not apply them¬ 
selves to their jobs. If we could get them, why we would not send 
down to New York and pay their fares back and forth. The skill that 
has been talked about by two of these men, when they are talking 
about foreign born, I want to say something about foreign born. Two 
of the witnesses who have testified here are foreign born. They have 
testified as to the skill; they have testified to that among other things. 
Now, I am not finding any fault with that, because my father and 
mother were foreign born and came over to this country when they 
were very young. 

Mr. Hardy. Did you say these Italians were members of the union; 
I did not understand? 

Mr. Tiiorp. We could not carry them if they were not. These men 
talk about skill. Not one man who has testified here has ever become 
a licensed officer, either in the engine crew or on deck—not one. 

Mr. Gahn. Did you say you could not carry them if they were or 
were not members of the union ? 

Mr. Thorp. If they were not members of the union. Two of these 
men are foreign born. They talk about skill. One of them was known 
as Deep-Sea O’Brien and he has a reputation all over the Lakes of be¬ 
ing a disturber and disorganizer. He could not work on a passenger 
boat on the Great Lakes that I know of; they would not have him. 
I know I would not have him; he could not work for me if he worked 
for nothing—absolutely. He is known as a forecastle lawyer. A 
forecastle lawyer is a man, in general parlance, who knows a little 
about everything and not much about anything. And that is his repu¬ 
tation from one end of the Lakes to the other. And he could not work 
for me if he worked for nothing. 

Mr. Briggs. Who did you say that was ? 

Mr. Thorp. Deep-Sea O’Brien. 

I have wired for certain information to Chicago and I have been 
getting these telegrams and one of them relates to the number of 
passengers our company has carried for the last 10 years. I will read 
it to you. Number of passengers carried in 19i0, 343,000; 1911, 
339,000; 1912, 305,000; 1913, 322,000; 1914, 295,000; 1915, 189.000; 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 479 

1916, 289,000; 1917, 132,000; 1918, 212,000; 1919, 406,000; 1920, 
369,000. Total, 3,201,000. 

In reference to the number of passengers carried in 1917, 132,000: 
This was the year that the water tank feel on the steamer CKristopher 
( olumbus. The accident occurred the third day of the season and 
the steamer was out of commission the balance of the }^ear. She was 
our largest passenger vessel, allowed 2,828 passengers. Consequently 
the number of passengers carried during the season was materially 
reduced—probably over 100,000. 

Mr. Davis. What line is that? 

Mr. Thorp. That is the Goodrich Transit Co., the line of which I 
am president. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the period of operation during which those 
passengers were carried? 

Mr. Thorp. Each year. 

Mr. Briggs. The whole year; for you season, or what period does 
that embrace? 

Mr. Thorp. That is for the full 12 months. But we do not do 
much passenger business, or rather our heavy passenger business is 
during the school vacation. 

Mr. Briggs. What months would that be? 

Mr. Thorp. July and August. Our largest excursion ship operates 
between Chicago and Milwaukee, doing an excursion business. In 
fact, we are the only people operating excursion ships out of Chicago 
at the present time. This boat is 200 feet long. 

Mr. Hardy. I want to ask you a question in regard to what you 
said about Mr. O’Brien. Did you offer him a job in 1920? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; I did not; I never offered him a job. I will 
take an oath I never offered him a job. 

Mr. Hardy. Did your company do it? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir; not to my knowledge. I would not have 
allowed it. 

Mr. O’Brien. Will you mind my calling your attention to the fact 
that in the conference in Detroit that you offered Mr. Conway and 
myself a job, and after Mr. Conway refused you turned to me and 
said, “What about you, Mr. O’Brien?” 

Mr. Thorp. If you say that, you are saying what is absolutely 
untrue. 

Mr. Hardy. Your testimony and his testimony are before the 
committee. 

Mr. Thorp. I did not want to interrupt him in his statements, but 
if he says that, I am saying now it is absolutely untrue, either one of 
them, and I will take an oath to it. 

Mr. Hardy. He will be allowed to testify. 

Mr. Thorp. They can not bluff me for a minute. 

Mr. Hardy. That is not the proper way to testify. I asked you a 
polite question, and a negative answer is your statement. Then he 
asked you a question. There was nothing in his question except if 
such and such a thing happened, and as a proper witness before this 
committee you should have answered yes or no. 

Mr. Thorpe. I am willing to have it all go in my testimony, every 
bit of it. I do not cut anything at all. The trouble is that these 
men have come here and been allowed to say and do anything they 
want to. 


480 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. But certainly they have not taken such liberties up 
to the moment that you are taking right at this time. You are tak¬ 
ing occasion right in the presence of this witness here to engage in 
a denunciatory statement. 

Mr. Thorpe. I am telling the truth. 

Mr. Hardy. Would you like to have one of them stand up here 
and state that you had not told the truth, and denounce you as a 
liar ? 

Mr. Thorpe. If they had the basis that I have, I think they would 
do it. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not know. 

Mr. Briggs. Mr. Chairman, I do not think this is getting us any¬ 
where. I think the witness should be allowed to proceed. 

The Chairman. Let us go on with business. 

Mr. Thorpe. The Titanic was brought into the question here, two 
or three times, too, in the testimony. I want to say that I have here 
Senate Report No. 806, Sixty-second Congress, second session, on the 
Titanic disaster, by the Committee on Commerce of the United States 
Senate, which was called Senator William Alden Smith’s committee. 
On page 4 it says: 

The Titanic was fitted with 16 sets of double-acting boat davits of modern 
type. * * * The Titanic was provided with 14 lifeboats, of capacity for 
65 persons each, or 910 persons; 2 emergency sea boats, of capacity for 35 
persons each, or 70 persons; collapsible boats, of capacity for 49 persons each, 
or 196 persons. Total lifeboat capacity, 1,176. 

On page 5 it says: 

Including the crew, the Titanic sailed with 2,223 persons aboard, of whom 
1,517 were lost and 706 were saved. 

In regard to what happened to her, the report says, on page 8: 

Leading Fireman Barrett saw the water rushing into the forward fireroom 
from a tear about 2 feet above the stokehold floor plates and about 20 feet 
below the water line, which tear extended 2 feet into the coal bunker at the 
forward end of the second fireroom. 

As to distress calls sent out, they say, on page 9: 

No general alarm was sounded, no whistle blown, and no systematic warn¬ 
ing was given the passengers. 

As to the capacity of lifeboats not utilized, the report says, on 
page 12: 

The twentieth boat was washed overboard when the forward part of the 
ship was submerged, and in its overturned position served as a life raft for 
about 30 people, including second officer Liglitoller, wireless operators Bride 
and Phillips—the latter dying before rescue—passengers Col. Gracie and Mr. 
Jack Thayer, and others of the crew, who climbed upon it from the water at 
about the time the ship disappeared. 

On page 13, the report says: 

It is evident from the testimony that as the list of the Titanic became notice¬ 
able the lifeboats scraped against the high side as they were being lowered. 

If I had the time I would like to read you just what preparations 
the captain of the Carpathia, Capt. Rostrom made. 

Here is a summary of the crew. Of the engine room department 
72 were saved out of 214, over 30 per cent; of the deck crew there 
were 46 saved. It has been said that these boats were undermanned. 
She had 20 boats and 46 men were saved, and there were more than 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 481 


two for each boat, of the deck department, that were actually saved. 
It does not look so bad. She was thoroughly manned. 

Mr. Scott. How large a crew was carried in the Eastland at the 
time of the disaster ? 

Mr. Thorp. I really could not tell you, offhand. The people that 
operated that boat, Mr.' Scott, were new in the business. When she 
was overturned she was chartered for the day to another company, 
and I do not know, but I should think she had anywhere from 100 
to 125 in her crew. I am not sure of that. 

Mr. Scott. In that disaster she was tied at the dock and tipped 
over? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. There were 812 people lost; 811 of them were pas¬ 
sengers, and one of the crew was lost? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. I knew some of the people that were aboard the 
ship, and talked to them after the disaster. In fact, I was up there 
within 30 minutes of the time she turned over and saw the attempt 
to rescue many people. 

Mr. Davis. To what line did the Eastland belong? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know what the name of that company was, 
because they had only been operating for a year or two. She was 
originally built for Lake Michigan, was taken down to Lake Erie, 
and was brought back to run from Chicago to St. Joe, Mich. This 
particular day the Michigan Electric Co. was making an excursion 
to Michigan City, and the Michigan City Line chartered her for 
that day. The photographs will show that when she had these 
people on her lines were not cast off even. She stayed right there 
with her lines fastened to the dock. 

Mr. Bland. Was she owned by your company? 

Mr. Thorp. No; she was built by people who were new in the 
business. There was one man named Harlow connected with it. 
1 do not know anyone else. 

Mr. Davis. Did that concern go out of business ? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. She is now one of the finest gunboats in the 
Navy? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; the Government owns her now. She was bought 
by some insurance companies for some people to make a naval 
training ship out of—some wealthy people of Chicago—and then she 
was commandeered by the Government, remodeled, and her charac¬ 
ter changed, and was then and is being now operated as a gunboat. 

Mr. Hardy. Was that sinking due to some mismanagement, or 
what was it due to ? 

Mr. Thorp. My information is, Judge Hardy, that they did not 
have the right kind of crew aboard her, and the boat was con¬ 
structed with water bottoms; that is, they put water in to ballast 
her. The crew came down, and she had a lot of people on. They 
expected this great crowd of people, and that is why these people 
chartered this boat for the day—and when I say “ these people I 
mean another steamboat company—to supplement their own boats 
to carry the crowd. And there is not anything worse than to have 
unconfinecl water in a ship, and she listed over; and instead of put¬ 
ting the water on the high side, it is quite apparent the engineer 

48420—21-31 


482 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 

put that water into the low side, and she kept going over until her 
gangways were submerged. She was a cranky ship, anyway. I 
have seen her go down through the Rush Street Bridge with a list 
like that [indicating]. 

Mr. Chindblom. You mean a list of about-45° ? 

Mr. Thorp. I know it was questionable whether she was going to 
get through the Rush Street Bridge or not. You know there is a 
very sharp turn there, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. Davis. The statement was made here the other day about the 
crew collecting on one side of the deck. With an ordinarily properly 
constructed ship, would that cause her to turn over? 

Mr. Thorp. This boat, as a matter of fact, gentlemen, was not an 
ordinarily constructed ship. I want to say that her construction was 
good, but the design was very bad. 

Mr. Davis. That is what I have reference to. 

Mr. Chindblom. She always stood up high ? 

Mr. Thorp. That has not got much to do with it, Congressman. 
It was her underbody. She had no bearings. She had what was 
called a barrel body, and there were not any bearings, and as soon as 
she took a list she went over. I came pretty near pulling into that 
thing at Grand Rapids, because they said I had said that the boat 
should never have been allowed to carry passengers. I did not say 
that, but I did say that with a reasonable number of passengers she 
would be all right; but with what she was allowed I do not think it 
was all right. 

Mr. Davis. With excursion boats on the Lakes is it deemed import¬ 
ant to take any precautions to prevent the passengers from collecting 
on one side of the vessel ? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, in some cases it is not; it depends upon the ship. 
Some ships have a great deal more stability than others. 

Mr. Davis. I had never heard of any controversy at all in that re¬ 
spect until the statement was made about the Eastland. 

Mr. Thorp. Let me tell you that within two years—I think it is 
two years—there was an identical case in New York Harbor. A ship 
just coming out of the shipyard, with nobody aboard, the St. Paul , 
laid over on her side and went down just the same as the Eastland 
did. There was no difference at all. She took a list and went down, 
and never did come up until they rescued her, and it was a long time 
before they did that. That was the transatlantic steamer, the St. 
Paul. 

Mr. Davis, Was she tied to the dock? 

Mr. Thorp. No ; they were trying to move her around the dock to 
her berth. 

Mr. Chindblom. Do you think the Virginia was narrow, in pro¬ 
portion to the Eastlandf 

Mr. Thorp. No ; and I will tell you why. 

Mr. Chindblom. She had that appearance from the bridge. 

Mr. Thorp. The Government made a technical test of all these 
ships up there, and we had private tests made of our ships. The 
Eastland's fault was in the design of her hull. She was just about 
the same length and the same beam, within a few inches, as the Vir¬ 
ginia, that Mr. Ridley bought from the Government, That was a ship 
that was commandeered by the Government, a ship we built and 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 483 


owned, and is now running from San Petro over to Catalina. There 
is hardly any difference in the dimensions of these ships, but a great 
difference in the design of the underbody of the ship. 

Mr. Chixdblom. Did the Virginia, stand up as high as the East- 
landf 

Mr. Thorp. Oh, yes; higher; with the upper works she was con¬ 
siderably higher, because we put two extra tiers of staterooms on her. 

Mr. Chixdblom. Then the trouble was below? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, the upper works on 
a ship, when you get her out in a sea wave, steady her. It is just like 
the sail of a ship on a sailing boat. You steady your ship with the 
sails. We will take the ship that Mr. Frank Kirby commandeered 
during the Spanish-American War. She had a very bad reputation 
as a roller. She was flat, shallow, and wide, but she had what he 
called accessibility, and when he got her for the Government service 
he took her down to Cuba and used her as a lighter, lightering troops 
and horses ashore in Cuba during the Spanish-American War. The 
first thing he did was to get two big, husky steam launches, and put 
them on her upper deck, and he piled out on the outside along her 
bulwarks pig iron as high as he could. Since we have got that boat 
we have put two extra tiers of staterooms on her. She is very high, 
but she is a good deal better sea boat than she ever was. If you take 
a ship with a sail up, she will not jump around, because the sail stead¬ 
ies her. It is the same with a steamboat. 

I will read some letters relative to discipline. The first is a letter 
from Mr. George B. McLaughlin, chief engineer of the steamship 
Christopher Columbus , dated Manitowoc, Wis.. November 1, 1916, 
addressed to me as vice president and general manager of the com¬ 
pany, which I was at that time. 

(Mr. Thorp thereupon read the letter referred to, as follows:) 

Goodrich Transit Co., 

S. S. “ Christopher Columbus,” 
Manitowoc. Wis., November* 1. 1916. 


Mr. H. W. Thorp, 

Vice President and General Manager, Chicago. 


Dear Sir : In reply to your inquiry of October 21 which states that since the 
seaman's bill has been in effect it has been impossible to get the firemen to 
attend fire and boat drills, especially while off watch, and if you insist on their 
doing so, they would quit and leave you shorthanded. 

It was a common occurrence for them to quit just before the boat would be 
ready to leave on her regular trip, and they did not care whether we were able 


to get anyone to replace them or not. 

As you know our average running time outside is about 94 hours out of 
the 24 hours, and the rest of the time we are alongside of the dock, where 
one man, or at the most, two men are sufficient to do the work, which left one 
man who either slept all night or would be ashore drunk, but would insist on 
being paid full time just the same. 

I must say that we had more trouble and less discipline among the men this 
season than* ever before in my 22 years in the steamship Columbus. 

Yours, respectfully, 

Geo. B. McLaughlin, 

Chief Engineer. 


Mr. Hardy. The seamen’s bill expressly provides that fire drills 
shall be had. and that the members of the crew may be required to 
engage in those drills. 

Mr. Thorp. Maybe. 


484 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 


Mr. Hardy. I am talking about what the law says. Is it not true 
that the seamen’s law requires the men to be all put through these 
drills? 

Mr. Thorp. It says in the seamen’s law that all the men in the 
crew shall participate, but you can not make them participate. 

Mr. Hardy. I am not talking about what you can make them do; 
I am asking how the law is. 

Mr. Thorp. I am interested in what you can make them do. 

Mr. Hardy. I am saying that is the law. 

Mr. Thorp. Very plain. It was read here before, I believe. 

Mr. Hardy. What can you do to enforce discipline except to pass 
laws like this one, like the seamen’s law requiring these drills to be 
done? 

Mr. Thorp. That was after the present law passed- 

Mr. Hardy. You spoke about wanting laws to enforce discipline. 
What can you do—— 

Mr. Thorp. You can draw your own conclusion, if you will let me 
proceed and read the other letters. 

Mr. Davis. What was the date of that letter? 

Mr. Thorp. November 1, 1916, after the close of that boat’s season. 
Now, I will give you specific cases, the names of the men, the time 
of day, and everything else. 

Mr. Hardy. I do not doubt that you have had troubles; we know 
you have; everybody knows that; but I am asking you what fault 
there is in the law? 

Mr. Thorp. That letter was from the chief engineer. Here is one 
from the master of another vessel. 

Mr. Scott. What portion of the law provides that they shall en¬ 
gage in the drills, Mr. Hardy? 

Mr. Hardy. You will find it there that nothing in this law shall 
prevent the boat owners from requiring the crew to participate in 
these various drills. It says: 

The seamen shall not be shipped to work alternately in the fireroom and on 
deck, nor shall those shipped for deck duty be required to work in the tire- 
room, or vice versa; but these provisions shall not limit either the authority 
of the master or other officer or the obedience of the seamen when, in the 
judgment of the master or other officer, the whole or any part of the crew are 
needed for the maneuvering of the vessel or the performance of work neces¬ 
sary for the safety of the vessel or her cargo, or for the saving of life aboard 
other vessels in jeopardy, or when in port or at sea from requiring the whole 
or any part of the crew to participate in the performance of fire, lifeboat, and 
other drills. 

Mr. Scott. I am familiar with the language of the law, but I 
understood him to say that there was something in the law which 
compelled attendance on boat drills, but I did not know- 

Mr. Thorp. There is no penalty if they do not, absolutely no pen¬ 
alty. That is very clear. 

Mr. Scott. Do you insist there is nothing in the law that precludes 
the officer from compelling them to attend drills ? 

Mr. Hardy. It leaves the officer with full autliorhy to require 
attendance, and if they do not obey, then the question" of penalties 
comes in? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 






AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 485 


Mr. Ihorp. I will now read a letter from D. J. McGaritv, master 
of the steamship Carolina , Goodrich Transit Co., dated Chicago, 
October 22, 1916, addressed to myself, and reading as follows: 

During the season just passed it has been thoroughly demonstrated that the 
seamen's law is a great hardship to the masters and mates of steamers that are 
required by law to carry a large number of able seamen. In the first place, 
the seaman’s knowledge that the law requires him has made discipline an abso¬ 
lute farce The men were not only insolent in their bearing toward the officers, 
but on numerous occasions fold the mates point blank that they did not ship 
on the boat to work, and that now that we are compelled to carry them we 
were going to dance to their music. 

Such things as ibis usually happened when the boat was out in the lake, 
and in nine cases out of ten we were headed for a port where it was impossible 
to secure another man, so in a great many cases we were forced to put up with 
such men for a week at a time before we could get another man to take their 
place. 

I could name dozens of cases where men refused duty out in the Lake, where 
men would go ashore and come back drunk at the last minute and demand 
their money. Some would go ashore when off watch and not show up at all, 
and some would quit in the middle of a watch at a port where it was an utter 
impossibility to secure another able seaman; but will cite only a few cases 
that are not any worse than lots of others that we had to contend with. 

On June 6 Otto Herman, able seaman, lookout on the second mate’s watch, 
came on watch at 6 p. m.; was seen at his station in the after gangway as late 
as 7.30. Boat was scheduled to sail at 7.45. When boat got in the Lake we 
found that he was not aboard. He had gone back to the purser and got his 
money without saying a word to the mate. 

On July 6 H. Ward, able seaman, shipped as a wheelsman on the first mate’s 
watch. Came on watch at noon out in the Lake, and after letting boat turn 
halfway around he informed the mate that he did not know the compass. Mate 
put watchman at wheel, and when wheelsman was told to stand watchman’s 
watch he refused and sat. in a chair on the promenade deck the rest of the after¬ 
noon. We were forced to carry this man three days before we could get another 
able seaman. 

On trip leaving Chicago, July 18, C. E. Halley, able seaman, wheelsman on 
watch when boat docked in Milwaukee at 7.50 p. m., due to sail again at 9 p. m., 
went ashore and came back drunk at leaving time and demanded his money. As 
I was unable to get a man to take his place, I persuaded him to stay aboard. 
Second mate steered the boat the rest of the watch and wheelsman was allowed 
to sleep. He took the wheel again at 6 p. m. the next day, and while passing 
the Eleven Foot Shoal Lightship that evening I spoke to him about his steering, 
and he let go of the wheel and walked out of the wheelhouse and told me to 
steer the boat myself. In order to comply with the law I was compelled to carry 
this man until July 23 before I could get a man to take his place- 

Mr. Hardy. Will you let me ask you, to clear up another question? 
I asked you if there was anything in the seamen’s law to prevent you 
from holding these drills which you say certain members of the crew 
refused to attend, and if I understood you right, you answered, when 
I read you this, “ but the provisions shall not limit either the authority 
of the master or other officer or the obedience of the seamen when, in 
the judgment of the master or other officer, the whole or any part of 
the crew are needed for the maneuvering of the vessel or the perform¬ 
ance of work necessary for the safety of the vessel or her cargo, or for 
the saving of life aboard other vessels in jeopardy, or when in port or 
at sea from requiring the whole or any part of the crew to participate 
in the performance of fire, lifeboat, and other drills ” * * * you 
said, or Mr. Scott, one or the other, that there was no penalty for 
desertion? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know of any. 



486 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. Now, look over here on page 4 of the seamen’s act. 
Section 7 reads as follows: 

That section 4596 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and is 
hereby, amended to read as follows: 

. “Sec. 4596. Whenever any seaman who has been.lawfully engaged or any 
apprentice to the sea service commits any of the following offenses, he shall 
be punished as follows: 

“ First. For desertion, by forfeiture of all or any part of the clothes or effects 
he leaves on board and of all or any part of the wages or emoluments which 
he has then earned. 

“ Second. For neglecting or refusing without reasonable cause to join his 
vessel or to proceed to sea in his vessel, or for absence without leave at any time 
within 24 hours of the vessel’s sailing from any port, either at the commence¬ 
ment or during the progress of the voyage, or for absence at any time without 
leave and without sufficient reason from his vessel, and from his duty, not 
amounting to desertion, by forfeiture from his wages of not more than two 
days’ pay or sufficient to defray any expenses which shall have been properly 
incurred in hiring a substitute. 

“ Third. For quitting the vessel without leave, after her arrival at the port 
of her delivery and before she is placed in security, by forfeiture from his 
wages of not more than one month’s pay. 

“ Fourth. For willful disobedience to any lawful command at sen, by being, 
at the option of the master, placed in irons until such disobedience shall cease, 
and upon arrival in port by forfeiture from his wages of not more than four 
days’ pay, or, at the discretion of the court, by imprisonment for not more 
than one month. 

“ Fifth. For continued willful disobedience to lawful command or continued 
willful neglect of duty at sea, by being, at the option of the master, placed in 
irons, on bread and water, with full rations every fifth day, until such dis¬ 
obedience shall cease, and upon arrival in port by forfeiture, for every 24 hours’ 
continuance of such disobedience or neglect, of a sum not more than 12 days’ 
pay, or by imprisonment for not more than three months, at the discretion of 
the court.’’ 

Does not that look like a pretty severe penalty for such offenses 
as you speak of ? 

Mr. Thori\ The loss of two days’ pay or four days’ pay? 

Mr. Hardy. For willful disobedience to any lawful command, im¬ 
prisonment for not more than one month, at the discretion of the 
court, or for continued willful disobedience to a lawful command, to 
imprisonment for not more than three months, at the discretion of 
the court, and forfeiture of wages. What penalt}^ do you suggest? 

Mr. Scott. Will you designate that? 

Mr. Hardy. That is section 7 of the seamen's act, giving the penal¬ 
ties for seamen's misconduct and lack of discipline on board vessels, 
which would come exactly in application to the existing case. 

Mr. Thorp. I will give you some concrete examples, one which 
happened in port and one which happened underway. If we put 
off a man the first place we came to we could not get that man re¬ 
placed by an able seaman; we could only replace him by a certifi¬ 
cated lifeboat man. 

Mr. Hardy. But I am asking you what law in any way does that? 

Mr. Thorp. I say this, that you would be fined if you let that man 
go and tried to operate without him, if you were not loaded to 
capacity. 

Mr. Hardy. Could you not, when you got into port, under this law, 
bring its provisions to bear on him? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think we could. 

Mr. Hardy. Then what kind of a suggestion would you make so 
that you could comply with the law ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 487 

Mr. Thorp. I am not making suggestions; I have- 

Mr. Hardy. L ou said you wanted some laws for discipline. I 
want to know what more rigid laws you could ask than section 7 of 
the seamen’s bill? 

Mr. Chindblom. Let me suggest that these provisions for punish¬ 
ing the men for disobedience and desertion are not intended to give 
any revenge to the officers or owners of the ship. They are intended, 
I presume, for the additional safety of the property and passengers 
on board ship. 

Mr. Hardy. I agree with you entirely. 

Mr. Chindblom. So that the seamen will give the proper service 
to the public. 

Mr. Hardy. I agree with you exactly, but what I want to know is 
what additional penalty we could put upon the men. The gentle¬ 
man said that he wanted some laws to enforce discipline. What 
additional penalty could be put in the law ? 

Mr. Chindblom. Does the amendment now under consideration 
provide for a change in that regard? 

Mr. Hardy. No ; it does not. That suggestion has been argued for 
a great while. 

Mr. Scott. It changes it in this respect, that in the event of the 
violation of the law on the part of the crew, when you get into port 
there are two things to do. You can either impose the penalty pro¬ 
vided in section 7 and put the man on the dock, but if you can not 
get another able seaman to take his place, in compliance with other 
sections of the law, you lay yourself liable to a violation of the law 
in your own conduct. My bill allows, in an event of that kind, the 
operator to comply with the law by putting on the ship, for the 
purposes for which the law was intended, the protection of the life 
of the passengers, a man competent to carry out that function and 
who might be available, and probably would be available, where the 
able seaman was not obtainable. 

Mr. Hardy. In that connection, let me quote you another provision 
of the law. 

When any vessel is deprived of the service of any member of the crew, in¬ 
cluding certificated lifeboat men, separately stated, without the consent, fault, 
or collusion of the man, owner, or any person interested in the vessel, the vessel 
may proceed on her voyage, if, in the judgment of the master, she is sufficiently 
manned for such voyage; provided the master shall ship, if obtainable, a number 
equal to the number of those whose service he has been deprived of by deser¬ 
tion or casualty, who must be of the same grade, etc. 

Mr. Thorp. In other words, that provision was put in there, Judge 
Hardy, and the letter I read to you, in regard to discipline, was in 
1912, and there was an association of steamboat owners trying to get 
that. It was before this law was passed. I quoted from a letter writ¬ 
ten to Mr. Burton in 1912, and if we had got the law, that is all we 
would want. We are not asking for an amendment to that law here; 
we are asking for some other amendments. 

Mr. Hardy. As I understand, this law in reference to discipline is 
all you want. 

Mr. Thorp. I say if we find it does cover, all well and good. 

Mr. Hardy. I just read it to you. 



488 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Those letters are dated 1916. Do you want it 
to be understood as a part of your testimony that they represent 
conditions as they are to-day, without improvement? 

Mr. Thorp. To a large extent; yes, sir; the same conditions pre¬ 
vail, but by changing it to certificated lifeboat men, it would cover us. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Do you want the committee to understand that 
the conditions have not improved as to discipline since 1916? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, Mr. Congressman, I would like to read letters 
in regard to actual happenings aboard ship in that year, but I have 
not got anything now to show what last year may have been. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Can you say, or do you not know ? Our inquiry, 
of course, is limited to the present time. The conditions may have 
changed, and I was wondering whether you could help us in regard 
to that. Can you say they are better or worse? 

Mr. Thorp. I will say we improved the conditions ourselves by 
getting these Italian sailors. These men come up to the Great Lakes 
and they ship on the boats in the spring, and they lay her up. We 
have had some of the men year after year, and they are men that 
you can thoroughly depend upon, and they are there to the end of 
the season, without change, and many of the men, particularly the 
boatswains, who get the men for us, stay there right along. I do not 
think we had them before the seamen’s act. I do not recall that we 
had them, but we have had them five or six years, and those men are 
exceptionally good men, and we have no trouble on that big ship, no 
trouble at all, where we have those men, and Ave have another ship, 
our best ship, on which Ave carry feAver men, but the same class of 
men. As far as that is concerned, Ave haA^e impro\ T ed the conditions 
by doing that. 

Mr. Davis. Mr. Thorp, prior to the passage of the seamen’s act, 
did you not have cases of insubordination from time to time? 

Mr. Thorp. We certainly did; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hardy. He wrote the letters in 1912 asking for discipline. 
That is the time he wrote that letter. Your complaint of a lack of 
discipline was in 1912. Was not that the letter you wrote to us? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think that pertained to a lack of discipline 
altogether. I guess the stenographer took that letter away. 

Mr. Scott. Congressman Kirkpatrick’s question Avas directed to 
the morale of the crew in the immediate past, Mr. Thorp. I do not 
knoAv whether you understood his question or not. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. I understood him to say that conditions had 
improved through the improved character of the men he Avas able 
to get. 

Mr. Thorp. The Italian sailors improved the conditions on those 
particular boats A^ery much. I said this, in this 1912 letter: “ The 
shipowner or operator must have the help of the Government laws 
before a full complement of creAv can be obtained, and the matter of 
wages and the number of crew.” 

Mr. Hardy. That is what I understood you to say. 

Mr. Thorp. That is what I said. That Avas in 1912, before the 
seamen’s act went into effect. 

May I go on with the reading of these letters? 

The Chairman. Yes; go on and let us finish if we can. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 489 


Mr. Thorp (reading) : 

On July 26 E. L. Mathieson, able seaman, watchman on second mate’s watch, 
when told to sweep the main deck, which has always been watchman’s duty, 
informed the second mate that he did not ship on the boat to sweep decks- 

Mr. Hardy. July 26 of what year? 

Mr. Thorp. 1916. I am still reading from Capt. McGarity's 
letter. 


As this happened on the trip to Mackinac Island, I was compelled to carry 
this man who did nothing but sleep and eat until I got back to Chicago before 
I could get another able seaman. 

On August 2 we docked at Escanaba at 7.45 p. m., due to leave again 
at 8 p. m. F. J. Carr, able seaman on first mate’s watch, who was off watch 
at the time, went ashore and did not come back at all. He was not missed 
until the watch was called at midnight. In this case we were fortunate in 
having an extra able seaman aboard, so we were not compelled to lose any time 
getting another man. 

These are only a few of many similar cases, and as this boat does not lay 
in port any great length of time while she is on her summer run, you can 
easily see what we are up against. We have had several cases where able 
seamen refused to attend fire and boat drill, due to the fact that it'was held on 
Sunday, the only day of the week that we laid in port long enough to have a 
drill. These drills were always held at noon when the men were changing 
watch, so they were not compelled to lose any sleep in order to be present. 
This did not make for discipline, for in most cases we were unable to get men 
to take their places, consequently, we could not discharge them. 

That we were not delayed more than we were was due to the fact that we 
always tried to have more able seamen than the law required in order to be 
prepared for emergencies. This, of course, caused extra expense to the boat, 
but had to be done to avoid delays. 

Complaints to the seamen’s union brought no relief; in fact, the mates were 
given to understand that if they could not get along with the men the union sent 
them they would have to go without. In view of the fact that these conditions 
did not exist before the passage of the seamen’s law, but seem to have been 
created by it, I am of the opinion that some steps should be taken to assure 
the master of the ship that his crew are not going to desert him in a port where 
he will be unable to secure other men and to put a stop to men quitting and de¬ 
manding their money at the time a boat is scheduled to sail. The law ( provides 
a penalty for licensed officers who willfully refuse to join their ships or act in 
their official capacity, and as the men are licensed as able seamen by the Gov¬ 
ernment they should come under the same law. 

Yours, truly, 

D. J. McGarity, Master. 


Mr. Davis. Did your company prosecute any of those offenders ? 

Mr. Thorp. I did not know of it until he wrote me at the eid of the 
season. I went out and inquired to find out what the conditions were 
aboard the boats that year. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Thorp, right there on the proposition you suggest 
in that letter there of the 16th, in the second division of section T, the 
men are penalized for neglecting or refusing to join the vessel. 

Mr. Scott. Let us follow that out to its logical conclusion. I 
thought you were going to be allowed to proceed to the end, but it 
might be just as well to follow this procedure. Suppose you had 
prosecuted your men as soon as you got into port; that is, 1 man, 2 
men, or 10 men, who had refused to obey the orders of the captain. 
You are running passenger vessels and time is an essential matter, and 
you pull into port and here are a certain number of incorrigibles that 
refuse to obey the orders in compliance with the laAV. Suppose that 
vou and your officers attempt to impose the penalty as provided by 
section 7,"is it not absolutely necessary that you stop your boat and 



490 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


get off and take your officer who gave the order and go to court and 
attend the hearings of the court, and what would be the delay ? The 
delay would be unlimited, and it might necessitate your entirely lay¬ 
ing up the ship in order to prosecute one man who was refusing to 
join the boat; is not that a fact ? 

Mr. Thorp. They usually take the course of least resistance and try 
to get men to replace them. 

Mr. Davis. Any court in the country would defer it to a convenient 
time, and the primary purpose of any penal statute is to defer others 
from doing likewise. If there were prosecutions, there would doubt¬ 
less be less violations. 

Mr. Scott. But my point was this, if you are attempting to prose¬ 
cute a man he is entitled to a speedy trial, and if it occurs in the 
month of June it does not seem reasonable to assume that the court 
would say to the man, who might reside in Buffalo, in a case where 
the occurrence had happened at Milwaukee, “ You will be obliged to 
appear at this court in September, after this ship lays up.” 

Mr. Davis. No ; he could set it for the next time he came into port— 
the next day or so. 

Mr. Scott. Even then they are only in port a few hours, and my 
thought w r as—and if I am not correct I want the witness to correct 
me—my thought was that if you attempted to enforce the law it 
would necessitate an unusual delay in the operation of this ship in 
order that the witnesses might appear in court and testify against 
the man who had violated the orders of the officers. 

Mr. Davis. I represented a railroad for many years, and I never 
at any time knew of a railway train to stop running in order for 
the employees to appear and testify as witnesses. 

Mr. Scott. That is true, but you understand there is only one 
eaptain on a ship, and there are many men connected with the rail¬ 
road who can operate a train. 

Mr. Hardy. As I understand Mr. Scott, we have the law, but we 
have not the time to enforce it. 

Mr. Scott. Its enforcement is practically impossible. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. There is one provision in the law that allows you 
to put a man in irons. I was wondering why that is not sufficient 
or is not enforced. You do not need any legal process to do that. 

Mr. Thorp. The discussion that is up is applicable to the case that 
I spoke of the other day, where the firemen on the boat demanded a 
dollar and a quarter an hour for furnishing steam to the steam pumps 
for a boat that was in trouble, when they were being paid their regular 
pay, and the men were laid off, and the union said that nobody else 
could go on that boat until they took them back. That is what 
happened. You can not get your men to replace them. 

Mr. Hardy. Does it not amount to this? You have stringent 
enough laws, but you do not enforce them, or do not care to? You 
would not want any extremer thing than putting a man in irons, 
would you? 

Mr. Thorp. I have not looked that over lately. 

Mr. Hardy. You look at section 7, and if you think there ought 
to be more extreme penalties let us know. 

Mr. Thorp. I do not care what the penalty is if you can not en¬ 
force it. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 491 

Mr. Hardy. If you can not enforce. I think you are right about it. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Do } t ou know of any case where they have en¬ 
forced that summary penalty of putting a man in irons? 

Mr. Thorp. 1 es; there have been cases, but none that I have been 
personally interested in, so I am not sure about that. I think there 
have been. But usually the sympathy has been with the men against 
the corporation, and we have to take our medicine. That is what 
usually happens to us. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. You do not need any legal process to put a 
man in irons right aboard ship, if he does not do a certain thing? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think there is a ship on the lakes that carries 
irons. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. That is what I asked you. I do not know 
whether there are or not. 

Mr. Thorp. I never heard of anybody being put in irons. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Thorp, if the whole crew in the instance you recite 
would walk off the ship, and you invoked the penalty of the law 
and put two or three of them in irons, aboard ship, what would be 
the attitude when the boat reached port ? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think vou would have many employees on 
your ship. 

Gentlemen, when you get right down to the whole thing, whether 
there is anything in this story that I am reading to you or not, or 
whether it is right or wrong, you can go to your shipping board 
and you can find out the troubles they are having to-day. The 
United States is up against this same thing. You do not have to 
take our word for it; you can go right to the officers of this Govern¬ 
ment and find out what is happening to-day. I do not ask you to 
believe this, I do not ask you to believe them, but go and get the 
testimony of the people that are operating the ships for the United 
States Government under present-day conditions. This is all you 
have got to do. 

Mr. Scott. You mean the reports of the supercargo man? 

Mr. Thorp. They are carried on the boat in order to report all 
those conditions, as I understand it. 

Mr. Hardy. You know, Mr. Thorp, that in any controversy be¬ 
tween you and the unions, the employer and employees, this com¬ 
mittee can only pass in law. As to whether you do enforce it or 
can enforce it, that is up to you. 

Mr. Thorp. I can only say what I am reading here. I am reading 
from letters written by" men actively engaged as licensed officers in 
ships on the Great Lakes, giving the story as to what they have been 
up against. 

Mr. Hardy. I will ask you just one other question. Does it not 
sometimes occur to you that by continually struggling to decrease 
the skill required and to increase the number from which you may 
draw the men who are claimed to be incompetent, that you may 
make things only worse for you instead of better, in your troubles 
with the unions, and that you are getting into a conflict that is going 
to injure both sides? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think that the amendments that are being 
asked here are going to produce any such condition, because we are 
asking for things that I do not think are unreasonable. Certainly, 
the length of the season- 


492 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 

Mr. Hardy. I am not talking about the length of the season. We 
have practically agreed on some things. I am against dragging that 
in here. 

Mr. Thorp. You are talking about what you are considering, and 
3 r ou are going to consider that, and you are going to consider other 
things; you are going to consider the substitution of certificated 
lifeboat men. 

Mr. Hardy. Your real purpose is to get a greater number of men 
from whom you sa}^ select your crew and decrease the required skill, 
in order that you may have a greater area from which you can draw 
your men? 

Mr. Thorp. No; we think those men have greater skill in many 
cases than the able seamen. 

Mr. Hardy. I say, is not that the purpose ? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir: not to lower the skill, because we believe that 
they have greater skill than the able seamen. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Thorp, let us see if I understand the situation which- 
you are attempting to describe here, and I think you have done it very 
well. At the present time and ever since the seamen’s law has been on 
the statute books, what has been the character of the men on board 
your ships from that time up to the present moment, as to being 
union men? 

Mr. Thorp. Being unionized? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Thorp. Everybody but the freight handlers are unionized. 
There are five unions on the boats. 

Mr. Scott. So that, in reality, you are a closed shop? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely. 

Mr. Scott. If you allow these unions to absolutely control your 
ships and handle your matters, you get along all right, do you? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, I have some more letters bearing on that same 
thing. 

Mr. Scott. But just the minute you attempt to run your own 
ships- 

Mr. Thorp. I can not do anything. I am not asking you to take 
action on anything I personally think. I am reading you letters from 
licensed officers that operate the ships—masters and engineers. 

Mr. Davis. When did the crews on your vessel become unionized,. 
Mr. Thorp? I think you stated it, but I have forgotten. 

Mr. Thorp. The unions have become to be unionized since the sea¬ 
men’s act. I can not give you the exact year. 

Mr. Davis. I understand that; but when did your boats first com¬ 
mence to employ union labor? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, we employed in some departments for a matter 
of, say, 10 years—in some departments. I think the first agreement 
with the unions was in 1916, so far as the masters, mates, and pilots 
are concerned, but we never had the cooks until after that time. 
They were not unionized. The engineers have had an association for 
many years, called the Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association, and 
it is just what the title would indicate; it was beneficial, not a labor 
proposition at all. The five unions to-dav are affiliated, and are affili¬ 
ated with the American Federation of Labor. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 11 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 493 


Now, I want to say one tiling about what happened- 

Mr. Briggs. Before you do that, I wish you would finish your 
statement about the period of time of these agreements. 

Mr. Thorp. The marine engineers, while they were organized as a 
beneficial association, were not a labor organization for many years 
after, and we have had to deal with them in a general way, with the 
rest of them. They all come in together. 

Mr. Briggs. When did you have your first agreement with them, 
or about when? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, under the present conditions, about three years 
ago. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean, when did you make a contract with the Ma¬ 
rine Engineers’ Beneficial Association? 

Mr. Thorp. About three years ago. 

Mr. Briggs. Was that the first time you ever had any contract for 
the operation of your vessels ? 

Mr. Thorp. Under the present conditions, yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I do not mean under present conditions, but what is 
the first agreement you entered into for the operation of your ships ? 

Mr. Tiiorp. I do not believe we have ever had a written agreement 
up until now. 

Mr. Briggs. Any kind ? 

Mr. Thorp. It might have been 10 years ago or 5 years ago. I do 
not recall just when our first agreement was. All these men have 
belonged to that organization, always. 

Mr. Briggs. When, with respect to the other men on your vessels, 
the other members of the crew, did you have your first agreement 
with them? You said you had an agreement with them. 

Mr. Thorp. The agreement with the masters, mates, and pilots, as 
. far as I recall, was in 1917. 

Mr. Briggs. What about the others ? 

Mr. Thorp. The agreement with the cooks was about the same time. 

Mr. Briggs. What about the others? 

Mr. Thorp. The engineers were not a union organization previ¬ 
ous to 1916. 

Mr. Briggs. Previous to the time this act went into effect? 

Mr. Thorp. That was after. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean, was your agreement with the engineers before 
the act went into effect, as well as since? 

Mr. Thorp. I think it was; yes, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. What about the deck hands? 

Mr. Davis. When did the seamen and the lifeboat men who were 
the men on deck, first become unionized, or when did you commence 
to employ them? 

Mr. Thorp. Several years back, previous to the act. I can not give 
the exact year, but it was previous to the act. 

Mr. Briggs. How about the firemen and oilers ? 

Mr. Thorp. About the same time as the seamen, because they work 
very close together. 

Mr. Briggs. Previous to the act? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes; about the same time. 

Mr. Scott. But you never had a closed shop so that you had to em¬ 
ploy union men exclusively until after the passage of the act ? 


494 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN *S ACT. 


Mr. THORr. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the nature of the agreement you had with 
these unions prior to the act ? 

Mr. Thorp. Just an agreement in regard to the wage scale—to pay 
them so much money. 

Mr. Briggs. Not with respect to your employing only union men? 

Mr. Thorp. No, sir. 

Mr. Briggs. But just to pay them so much money? 

Mr. Thorp. In some of them we have. I read into the record this 
morning, in one case previous to the act, where we were to employ 
nothing but organization men. 

Mr. Briggs. Who was that by? 

Mr. Thorp. I think that was previous to the act. 

Mr. Briggs. Whose case was that ? 

Mr. Thorp. It was a controversy we had- 

Mr. Briggs. I do not mean the case; I mean with what branch of 
the union ? 

Mr. Thorp. The sailors and firemen. 

Mr. Chindblom. Do all of your agreements now with the unions 
provide for a closed shop ? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, if they do not provide for it, they take mighty 
good care that we do not employ anybody. I have read into the record 
here this morning about the cooks, and the mates always did. 

Mr. Briggs. How about the others ? 

Mr. Thorp. As I said, we can not get the men. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean was there anything in the contract with them 
that indicated that only that character of men should be employed? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not know whether I have this year’s contract with 
them or not. We have no contract with them this year yet; there is 
no contract. I see they are making faces over here, but, nevertheless,, 
the wage scale has not yet been decided on, but I will read you what 
it says. 

Mr. Chindblom. When does your season begin ? 

Mr. Thorp. We are operating all the time. 

Mr. Chindblom. When does the contract begin? You say you have 
not any agreement yet. For what period do you mean? 

Mr. Thorp. We have an agreement for 1921 with two organizations 
represented here, and I will give you that. I have not the original,, 
but I have got it at the hotel, and the contracts: 

The Goodrich Transit Co. agrees to have the United States Shipping Board 
arbitrate the question of wages and working conditions for your members on 
our steamers for the season of 1921. Pending the result of such arbitration 
your members are allowed to draw on account up to 80 per cent of the 1920 
wage scale, the 8-hour day for sailors to continue pending the result of such 
arbitration. 

That is the only contract with the sailors and firemen this season. 

We have an agreement with the cooks and stewards in w T hich is 
embodied the condition that after one marine trip we must require 
the men to join the union. 

With the engineers, masters, mates, and pilots, we are operating 
without any contract or any agreement of any kind at the present 
time, but the men themselves have given their assurance in writing 
that they will remain on the ships. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 495 


Mr. Briggs. What contract did you have last year? 

Mr. Thorp. They are just the contracts for 1920 , because I have 
not any real contract with them, except with the cooks this year. 

Mr. Briggs. Is this the only thing in writing you have, in connec¬ 
tion with previous years here? 

Mr. Thorp. No ; but it has not been customary to have it with 
certain of the organizations. I think perhaps up until two years ago 
we have had a signed contract, except in exceptional cases of in¬ 
dividuals, with sailors and firemen. I do not recall any previous to 
three years ago. 

Mr. Hardy. Mr. Thorp, you had an agreement in 1920 with the 
unions, did you not ? 

Mr. Thorp. I did not say we did not have. We did sign a contract. 
May I see that contract you have ? May I read it ? 

Mr. Chindbloom. Can you not put that in the record without 
reading it? 

Mr. Briggs. He just wants to identify it. 

Mr. Thorp. I just want to read it myself. It does not say ex¬ 
clusively, but we have to do it, gentlemen, because we can not do any¬ 
thing eise. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that a copy of the contract? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. You might as well put that in the record. 

Mr. Thorp. It does not mean anything, one or the other. 

Mr. Hardy. You can put that in, in answer to my question. 

(The contract referred to is as follows:) 

MEMORANDUM of agreement. 

Memorandum of agreement made and entered into at Detroit, Mich., April 
9, 1920, by and between the undersigned passenger-steamboat lines, and the 
Firemen, Oilers, and Watertenders’ Union, and the Sailors’ Union, to cover the 
season of 1920, from April 1. 

Witnesseth: 

That there shall be an advance in wages to the members of the said unions 
employed on the boats of the passenger steamboat lines of 25 per cent over 
last year’s scales and the said unions shall have an opportunity to put into 
operation an 8-hour day, as to their members, if it can be done without the 
employment of additional men, and without additional expense to the pas¬ 
senger steamboat lines, the same to be under the supervision and subject to 
the approval of the officers of the ships, the said officers to have orders to 
cooperate in establishing said 8-hour day: Provided, however, That it is under¬ 
stood that on certain steamers one or two additional coal passers may have 
to be employed. 

Chicago, Duluth & Georgian Bay Trust Co., Chas. J. Bour, General 
Manager; the Michigan Trust Co., Receiver; Graham U. Morton 
Transportation Co., by J. S. Morton, manager; the Lake Erie 
Erie Excursion Co., M. J. McAlpine, manager; Perre Marquette 
Line Steamer, Gus Kitzinger, president; Chicago & South Haven 
Steamship Co., C. L. Beigh, manager; Thomas Conway, for 
Marine Firemen, Oilers, and Watertenders’ Union; Patrick 
O’Brien, Sailors Union of the Great Lakes; Detroit & Cleve¬ 
land Navigation Co., by S. A. Schantz; the Cleveland & Buffalo 
Transit Co., by T. F. Newman, general manager; Ashley & 
Dustin Steamer Line, O. S. Dustin, secretary and treasurer; 
White Star Line, by C. F. Bielman, jr., secretary and general 
manager; W. E. Campbell, D. & W. Ferry Co.; Goodrich Transit 
Co., by H. W. Thorp, vice president and general manager; 
Chicago, Racine & Milwaukee Line, by E. W. Seymour, manager; 
Michigan Transit Co., Geo. E. Johnson. 


496 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Davis. Mr. Thorp, the press has stated that Admiral Benson 
requested the operators to agree to a 15 per cent reduction, and they 
have practically done so. Did your company acceed to that request ? 

Mr. Thorp. That was not on the Great Lakes. We are not in¬ 
volved in the controversy with regard to the coast or Atlantic 
business. 

Mr. Davis. That does not affect your lines? 

Mr. Thorp. Absolutely not; in no way at all. That is entirely 
separate. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you completed your testimony? 

Mr. Thorp. I have not read all of the letters. I think, if you 
will allow me to proceed, I could read these in five minutes. 

Here is a letter from Joseph Peroutka, the chief engineer of the 
steamship Virginia , reading as follows: 


Goodrich Transit Co., 

S. S. Virginia, 

Manitowoc, Wis., October 2 It, 1916. 


M. H. W. Thorp, Vice President and General Manager, Chicago. 

Dear Sir : Replying to your letter of the 19th relative to troubles experienced 
with the crew in the engineer’s department during the past season. 

The crew having been increased by one-third in the tire hold, it gave the men 
more leisure than formerly. The majority spent it in making themselves unfit 
to do their work, and when in that condition their demands were very unrea¬ 
sonable. We were forced to comply with most of them, however unjust, or else 
cause delay to the boat. 

I will cite one instance: On June 2, at Muskegon, Mich., two firemen, half 
intoxicated, complained about the food and demanded their money 15 minutes 
before sailing time. We investigated and found their complaint without foun¬ 
dation. We tried to reason with them, but it was useless. Upon our refusing 
to pay them unless they finished the trip, they then threatened to take the rest 
of the firemen oft' of the boat unless we gave them their money and did succeed 
in getting three of them to go. 

If we did not have to contend with the new law requiring a full complement 
of men before sailing the difficulty would have easily been overcome by leaving 
the dissatisfied ones on the dock, but as it was we had to give in to them. 

There were other occasions too numerous to mention where the new law 
practically tied our hands in regards to handling the men. . 

I will be pleased to furnish you with any details I have not covered in this 
letter. 


Yours, truly, 


E. Peroutka, Chief Engineer. 


Here is another letter from the chief engineer of the steamship 
Alabama , reading as follows: 

Goodrich Transit Co., 

S. S. “Alabama,” 

October 21, 1916. 

Mr. H. W. Thorp, 

Vice President and General Manager, Chicago. 


Dear Sir : In reference to your request regarding experiences with men since 
the seamen’s act has gone into effect. 

Will recall two cases, one on May 3, three firemen became intoxicated while 
laying at Grand Haven. I was obliged to have the second assistant engineer 
go in the fireliold and keep steam after leaving port. 

Another case on October 7, two firemen quit while laying at Grand Haven 
in the evening without a cause. We also have trouble with men getting left, 
especially in the summer months. Coal passers average about the same as 
firemen. Oilers have been changing often but are sober and doing as well as 
can be expected. 

Yours, truly, 


E. Peroutka, Engineer. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 497 

Here is another letter from J. P. Breuer, chief engineer of the 
steamship Carolina , reading as follows: 


Mr. H. W. Thorp, 

Vice President and 


Goodrich Transit Co., 

S.,S- “Carolina,” 
Chicago October 27, 1916, 

General Manager , Chicago. 


Dear Sir: In response to yours of the 19th instant, can make the following 
report: 

During the season of 1916 up to date we shipped on the S. S. Carolina 87 
firemen and 120 coal passers. These are men who actually made the trip. We 
shipped many more who never showed up at the time of sailing, and so often 
went out short handed, but most times we were able to fill out our crew from 
the deck or pick up men along the route and therefore never delayed the boat. 

One fact that stood out clear is that the men were very independent, and one 
had only to hint at some work outside of tlieir regular firing to have them ask 
for their money, which would be about 5 or 10 minutes before leaving time. 

I was fortunate to have three oilers and three firemen on whom I could rely, 
and this fact alone kept the others from carrying out dirty tricks, as they knew 
they could not persuade these men to act with them. 

I hope I’ll never experience the. same trouble and same labor conditions 
again, as it kept us all in hot water until we got away from the dock, looking 
after our crew. 

Respectfully, yours, J. P. Breuer, Chief Engineer. 


The next is a letter from H. C. Hankans, chief engineer of the 
steamship Arizona , reading as follows : 


Goodrich Transit Co., 


Mr. H. W. Thorp, 

Vice President and General Manager, Chicago. 


S. S. “Arizona,” 
October 27, 1916. 


Dear Sir : In reply to your letter of the 19tli, requesting my experiences with 
the men of my department during the past season, must say they were by far 
the worst I have ever experienced. 

On the 7th of June the boat was delayed about 35 minutes on account of 
very unreasonable grievances of the firemen. During the run to the Soo they 
quit wherever they happened to take the notion. Discipline became a farce. 

Yours, truly, 


H. C. Hankans, Chief Engineer. 


The next is a letter from Mr. D. Mackey, master of the steamship 
Arizona , reading as follows: 


Mr. 


Goodrich Transit Co., S. S. “Arizona,” 

October 2Jf, 1916. 

H. W. Thorp, 

Vice President and General Manager, Chicago. 


Dear Sir : In answer to yours of the 19tli, in regard to able seamen, will say 
that I have had considerable trouble with able seamen since the seamen’s act 
went into effect, especially during the months of June, July, and August of this 
year. 

There have been several cases where able seamen would quit when steamer 
was ready to sail. Nearly every trip during July and August have been obliged 
to carry able seamen that were drunk and not able to do their work. Some, 
even though sober, were incompetent, as they could not steer the steamer or 


box the compass. 

Never in my experience have I had as much trouble with the men a's during 
the past season, much of it I consider due. to the seamen’s act. 
lYmrs, respectfully, 

M. D. Mackey, Master. 


Mr. Davis. Those were received in answer to a letter of inquiry 
from you. Have you a copy of your letter there ? 

48420—21-32 


498 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Thorp. No; I have not. I may be able to furnish that to 
the committee. I have not it here. I just simply asked for their 
experience during the season. 

Mr. Davis. They all indicated that you made some inquiry with 
respect to the seamen’s act. 

Mr. Thorp. Well, since the seamen’s act went into effect. I sin¬ 
cerely wanted to know what the conditions were that they had ex¬ 
perienced during the season. I had heard different things that 
came to me. 

Mr. Davis. Much of your trouble appeared through the drunken¬ 
ness? 

Mr. Thorp. Quite a good deal. 

Mr. Davis. Do you have the same trouble now in that respect that 
you did before the eighteenth amendment? 

Mr. Thorp. We have a great deal of trouble on account of it. 
They only have to get one drink instead of half a dozen. It puts 
them out op business a good deal quicker and makes them a good 
deal uglier. 

Mr. Kirkpatrick. Do you have as much of it? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think we have had as much drunkenness, but 
we have had some of it. The eighteenth amendment has not kept it 
all out by any means. 

I want to tell you one actual experience and then I will quit. In 
1919 we were having a controversy with the masters, mates, and 
pilots over wages. That would not apply to our line alone, but all 
the lines on Lake Michigan. The man who represents that organi¬ 
zation was in Chicago; he lives in Buffalo. Our conferences ran 
over a period of four or five days and we were not getting anywhere. 
He called me up and asked me if I would see him, and I told him 
yes. It was Saturday afternoon. There was not another soul on 
the floor of the building that we had our offices in, aside from the 
switchboard operator. In the course of my talk with these men, 
they brought to our office the secretary of the American Federation 
of Labor, or the Illinois Federation of Labor, and they brought down 
John Fitzpatrick, the man that attempted to put the steel company 
out of business here, and organized the steel union. I said to him 
during the course of the conversation, “ How much do you thin]* 
a shipowner should be allowed on his investment”? He said, “ Un¬ 
less you have increased their salaries fOO per cent in the last two 
years, you should not have a cent.” lie turned around to the men 
and said, “ Have they done that ” ? And the}^ said no. He says, 
“ There is your answer.” He stepped to the window of my office and 
looked out and says, “ You expect the men to be here on Monday 
morning”? I said, “We hope so.” He says, “You expect a lot 
of teams to back up here with freight ”? I said, “ Yes, we hope so.” 
Pie said, “You had better settle with these men. You can not tell 
where it is going. They are affiliated with the American Federation 
of Labor. You can not tell where they are going.” 

I am through. 

Mr. Briggs. Are all your vessels passenger-carrying vessels? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir; not exclusively passenger; we have two ex¬ 
clusively passenger vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. Which two are those ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 499 

Mr. Thorp. The steamships Christopher Columbus and the Florida. 
i he other four are passenger and package freight vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. ^ on stated where those vessels plied in your previous 
testimony, did you not? 

Mr. Thorp. I do not think I did. 

Mr. Briggs. Please state that for the record. 

Mr. Thorp. The Christopher Columbus is in the day excursion 
business, operating between Chicago and Milwaukee and return, 
making a round trip each day. The steamer Florida operates from 
Chicago to Michigan City and return. The round trip of the 
Columbus is 170 miles, and the round trip of the Florida is 76 miles. 
At night she takes a moonlight excursion out from the municipal 
pier. 

Mr. Briggs. How long? 

Mr. Thorp. About two hours. Our steamer Indiana last year— 
the runs have changed this year; we have not them all operating— 
but she ran between Chicago and Milwaukee. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the passenger-carrying capacity of these 
vessels ? 

Mr. Thorp. The Columbus at one time was the largest passenger 
carrier on the lakes. She now is licensed to carry 2,828. 

Mr. Briggs. What is the other ? 

Mr. Thorp. The Florida carries six hundred and something, and 
the Indiana eight hundred and something, I think. I can not give 
you those figures right offhand. They change somewhat each year. 

The Alabama operates between Chicago, Grand Haven, and Mus¬ 
kegon the year round, making three round trips a week, 250 miles. 

Mr. Briggs. When do those vessels start in the service? 

Mr. Thorp. Some of our boats operate all winter long, steady. 

Mr. Briggs. I mean these in the excursion business. 

Mr. Thorp. During the school vacation, probably; we will say 
from the 28th of June to Labor Daj^. The Alabama operates 365 
days in the year. 

Mr. Briggs. She is a combination freight and passenger boat? 

Mr. Thorp. Yes, sir. She is our best ship, the largest outside of 
the Columbus , which is an exclusively passenger ship. I think the 
allowance for the Alabama last year was 1,238, or something like 
that. 

The Carolina operates from Chicago to Grand Haven and Muske¬ 
gon just the same as the other boat, making the same run, and 
carrying about 700 passengers, from May 15 to September. 

The Arizona operates from Chicago to Washington Island and 
return, about 600 miles, round trip. She makes one trip a week there 
and makes three round trips from Chicago to White Lake and re¬ 
turn. Four of the ships are steel and two are wood. 

Mr. Briggs. Were these vessels being operated at a profit during 
the past year ? 

Mr. Thorp. Well, last year—I put in a statement about that. 

Mr. Briggs. I do not want to ask you anything that you have 
already testified to. 

Mr. Thorp. I have given it to you for 10 years. 

(Whereupon the committee took a recess until 2.30 o'clock p. m.) 


500 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


AFTER RECESS. 

The committee reconvened, pursuant to recess, at 2.30 o'clock p. m., 
Hon. William S. Greene (chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

STATEMENT OF MR. R. J. MacLEAN, CHAIRMAN INLAND WATER¬ 
WAYS COMMITTEE, DETROIT BOARD OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. MacLean. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee* on 
behalf of the Detroit Board of Commerce, which I represent directly, 
and on behalf of the other boards of commerce on the Great Lakes, 
which I represent indirectly through the delegation that came here, 
I wish to enter a very earnest protest against the comments that 
have been made regarding the weather conditions on the Great 
Lakes. Those comments, I believe, have been made not intentionally 
to injure the reputation of our Great Lakes country, but I believe 
have been made in the course of debate. This conference, as you 
all know, has resolved itself to a very considerable extent into a 
debate between men representing organized labor and men represent¬ 
ing the shipowners. I am here representing the shippers and travel¬ 
ing public. Now, if we did not have a splendid climate and good 
climatic conditions on the Great Lakes, we would have no passenger 
ships. It is not necessary for a man to travel by boat in going from 
any of the ports of the Great Lakes to other ports of the Great 
Lakes. We have the very finest train service. The reason that 
men travel by boat is that they prefer to travel by boat. 

The question has been raised regarding the danger of navigating 
on the Great Lakes, and if I were a member of this committee I 
would be almost afraid to go up to the Great Lakes and take a trip 
on our splendid passenger ships. T do not know what would be said 
by at least one or two members of this committee if I were to call 
attention to the cyclones and wind storms and sand storms that 
occur occasionally in the great State of Texas. I believe there 
would be a protest on behalf of at least one or two members of 
this committee, and rightfully so, because while they have cyclones 
and dust storms and wind storms in the great State of Texas, they 
also have one of the finest climates down there of any State of the 
Union. I have relatives there who speak in the highest terms of 
Texas. 

I might further call attention to the cyclones that occasionally 
occur in Nebraska, that have torn up part of Omaha, and yet no one 
would contend that it is dangerous to travel through the State of 
Nebraska. Persons are struck by lightning even in New York City, 
as civilized a place as that. We do not contend on the Great Lakes 
that we have no storms. We have the same kind of storms on the 
Lakes as on land. Occasionally we have thunder storms in the 
summer time, especially in June. 

Yesterday, in view of what has been said before this committee 
regarding the dangerous conditions of navigation on the Great 
Lakes, I telegraphed the shipowners, at least three or four of them, 
and I have their replies. I telegraphed to the Ashley-Dustin Line, 
of Detroit, Mich., as follows: 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 501 


How many years has your line been in operation? How many passengers 
have been carried during that time? How many passengers have you lost 
through storms or negligence on your part? 

1 his is the reply which came in a few moments ago: 

Our line lias been in operation over 60 years. For the last 10 years the yearly 
average has been 343,766 passengers. Prior to that we have no records. We 
have never lost a passenger through neglect or by storm. Signed, Ashley-Dustin. 

The following telegram I sent yesterday to Mr. Allen I. Holloway, 
a member of the Board of Commerce of the City of Buffalo: 

How many passengers have been lost due to storms during the past 10 years 
on passenger ships plying exclusively out of Buffalo? 

This is the reply of Mr. Holloway: 

No persons lost by drowning on passenger ships plying from Buffalo during 
past 10 years. Information obtained from United States steamboat inspector. 

The following telegram I sent to White Star Line of Detroit: 

How many years your line in operation? How many passengers have you 
carried during that time? How many passengers have been lost due to storms 
or negligence on your part? 

Mr. C. F. Bielman, general manager of the White Star Line, tele¬ 
graphed me in reply as follows: 

The White Star Line in operation since 1S96. First 15 years, average pas¬ 
sengers carried 500.000 per year. Since that time from 750,000 to 1,000,000 
each season. Never have lost passenger’s life, except by suicide. 

The following telegram I sent to Mr. T. F. Newman, general man¬ 
ager of the Cleveland & Buffalo Lines at Cleveland, Ohio: 

How many years has your Cleveland and Buffalo ships been in operation? 
How many passengers have they carried during that time, and how many 
passengers have you lost through storms or negligence on your part? 

The answer to that telegram is as follows: 

Our ships have been operating between Cleveland and Buffalo since 1893. 
During that time have carried many thousands of passengers without the loss 
of one single passenger from any cause whatsoever, excepting suicide. 

That telegram is signed by T. F. Newman, general manager of the 
Cleveland & Buffalo Transit Co. 

The following telegram was sent to Mr. A. A. Shouts, president of 
the Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co., Detroit, Mich.: 

How many years have the Detroit and Cleveland ships been running? How 
many passengers have they carried during that time, and how many passengers 
have been lost during that time through storm or negligence on your part? How 
many passengers have you carried during the past 10 years? How many pas¬ 
sengers have been lost through storm or negligence on your part? 

Mr. Shouts answered me as follows: 

Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co. have operated 60 years and have never 
lost the life of a passenger, nor have we had a serious accident in that time 
caused by storm or negligence. During the past 10 years we have carried an 
average of 428,424 passengers per season without any accident or loss of life. 

That telegram was signed by Mr. A. A. Shonts, president of the 
Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co. 

I did not want any member of this committee to reach the conclu¬ 
sion that just because we have not lost any lives on our side of the 
Great Lakes that there may not be storms on the other side, the 


502 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Canadian side, and so I sent the following telegram to the marine 
department of the Canadian Government at Ottawa: 

How many passengers have been lost on Canadian ships plying the Great 
Lakes during the past 10 years due to storms? 

All those telegrams were signed by B. J. MacLean, of the Detroit 
Board of Commerce. 

The following is from the marine department of the Canadian 
Government: 

Your wire 18tli instant. Marine department records show no passengers 
lost on Canadian ships due to storms during the past 10 years. Signed, E. 
Hawken. 

I believe, gentlemen, that I could offer no stronger proof than 
what I have offered you in regard to the fact that we have good 
climatic conditions on the Great Lakes, and I want to invite all of 
you gentlemen to visit us whenever you have an opportunity, and 
I can assure you that you will come back to Washington well repaid 
of the trip. 

I thank you. 

Mr. Scott. I desire at this point to introduce as part of the record 
resolution No. 20, adopted b t y the Legislature of Michigan memorial¬ 
izing the Congress of the United States to amend the La Follette 
Act. This resolution was adopted by the house and senate unani¬ 
mously, and it was passed at the session of the legislature which 
closed last week. 

Mr. Free. Will you read it? I am interested in knowing its 
provisions. 

Mr. Scott (reading) : 

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 20. 

A Resolution memorializing Congress to amend the La Follette Act so as to alleviate 
burdens now carried by Great Lakes shipping. 

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan (the 
Senate concurring), That the existing laws of the United States governing the 
operation of vessels upon the Great Lakes and connecting waters are unreason¬ 
able to an extent that makes their continued operation a grievous burden and 
in many cases an impossibility. The conditions on the Great Lakes are vastly 
different than those on the high seas; runs are comparatively short, and 
steamers are seldom out of sight of land, and then only for a comparatively 
short time. The laws in question give vessels too little authority in times of 
danger; vessels plying on short runs are unnecessarily required to operate 
under the three-watch system; the operating season is too short; unnecessary 
men are required, thus adding to the expense and forcing the already high 
passenger and freight rates to a still higher and almost prohibitive level. 

These severe and inelastic regulations are totally unnecessary upon the Great 
Lakes. Neither necessity nor safety have counseled them. They have well- 
nigh paralyzed the passenger traffic and made the freight traffic an insupport¬ 
able burden to the public. 

In view of these facts, the Congress of the United States is respectfully re¬ 
quested to so amend and modify the La Follette Act, so called, as to alleviate 
these restrictive and burdensome conditions, and to do so as quickly as possible; 
and be it further 

Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions he transmitted by the clerk of the 
house of representatives to each of the Senators and Representatives from this 
State in Congress of the United States, and they are hereby respectfully requested 
to use their utmost endeavors to secure the amendments to the said law. 

Mr. Jefferis. Was it unanimously adopted? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 503 

Mr. Scott. Unanimously adopted by both the house and senate. 
Supplementing the statement made by Mr. Thorp this morning, I 
desire to introduce as a part of the record the report of the super¬ 
cargo men on board ships operated by the United States Govern¬ 
ment through its agency, the United States Shipping Board. I will 
be very glad to accept the suggestion of the committee regarding 
that. 1 have no wish to burden this record, and I can do it by ref¬ 
erence to such testimony taken at a previous hearing. That would 
obviate the necessity of repetition in this record. These letters were 
submitted and are a part of the previous hearing, not an amendment 
to the Great Lakes, but were submitted by the United States Shipping 
Board in connection with the bill at that time before this committee. 

Mr. Hardy. Kefer to the page and date. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; I will be very glad to accept the suggestions of the 
committee. 

Mr. Gahn. May I inquire if those hearings are available to the 
members of the committee? 

Mr. Scott. They are available here. 

Mr. Hardy. I have no objection to their being placed in the record 
in that way. 

Mr. Scott. They are not very long. They picked out brief reports 
that were made by the supercargo men. 

Mr. Gahn. I suggest that you put them in this record. 

Mr. Scott. They are not long. Instead of selecting all of them I 
might pick out two or three of them and insert them in this record. 

Mr. Free. What is a supercargo? 

Mr. Scott. A supercargo is a new adjunct that was deemed neces¬ 
sary at the close of the war, in view of the fact that we had thou¬ 
sands of ships operating on the ocean owned and operated by the 
United States Government. In view of that fact—that the Ship¬ 
ping Board was operating them in behalf of the Government— 
they thought it wise to put some one on the ships who was not in 
any way connected with the operation of the ship or with anyone on 
the ship to report in detail the conduct of the officials and everyone 
else on the ship to the Shipping Board, in order that they might get 
an unprejudiced statement from an unprejudiced person as to the 
methods and manner in which our ships were being operated. 

Mr. Free. Was this on the ocean that they were being operated? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; we have no ships being operated on the Great 
Lakes. 

Mr. Hardy. Would there be any objection in putting the examina¬ 
tion of these supercargoes before the Senate committee? There are 
some parts of that that I might want to submit. 

Mr. Scott. I do not think so. 

Mr. Hardy. You spoke of the ocean as well, and also a statement 
of Mr. Kosseter to show the total difference between the cost of the 
operations between American and British ships on the ocean amounted 
to about 2 per cent. 

Mr. Briggs. That was with reference to manning a vessel. That 
was two years ago. 

Mr. Scott. That is not different now. The difference is approxi¬ 
mately 25 per cent. 

Mr. Hardy. That would be different. Of course, the difference m 
exchange might make a vast difference. 


504 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. I will therefore insert at this point a report made by 
a man on his first trip to sea as a supercargo, and which was sent to 
the Division of Operations of the United States Shipping Board on 
July 28, 1919: 

En Voyage Antwerp to New York, 

July 28, 1919. 

Attention Supervisor Weems. 

Division of Operations, 

United States Shipping Board, Washington, D. C. 

DISCIPLINE ABOARD AMERICAN VESSELS. 

Gentlemen : The steamship-on her maiden voyage has lost, in possible 

earnings, many thousands of dollars by reason of the lack of means for main¬ 
taining discipline among the members of her crew, particularly in the engine 
department. Not only has this loss been entailed, but from the same cause the 
safety of the vessel has been jeopardized. 

This strikes me as a situation demanding very serious consideration on the 
part of the Shipping Board, with a view to securing an effective remedy. The 
importance of the question prompts me to report, somewhat in detail, the 

experiences of the-, as I have observed them on her initial voyage. This 

will take the form of an abridged running account of events, supplemented by a 
recapitulation and a few recommendations. 

The union’s delegate in New York sent to the vessel an ignorant, rather 
degenerate class of men to till the positions of fireman, oiler, and water tender. 
A few of them were illiterate. Half of them did not have their passports, 
certificates of residence, or references. In some instances the men were 
engaged and put on the pay roll upon their promise to get their papers put in 
order before the time arrived to sign the articles. Although reminded from 
day to day of their promise, the date for signing the articles (June 14) found 
them generally unprepared. The captain had been instructed to clear his ship 
on that day, so that he could shove off early the following Monday. The fact 
that these men did not have their papers ready caused such a delay that it 
became physically impossible to clear the vessel on the 14th. 

While still in port the men gave more or less trouble by leaving the ship 
during working hours and at night, after pay day, in going ashore and getting 
drunk. We sailed at 6.30 p. m. June 16, with the trial board. Within an hour 
and a half a thick fog settled over us and we had to anchor. In one respect 
this fog was fortunate, because it veiled the utter incompetence of the crew, 
whose drunken condition would have made a farce of any trial trip if the 
weather conditions had permitted. 

After a couple of days at sea the men began, now one, now another, to 
complain of the food, contending that there either was not enough of it or 
that its quality was poor. As a matter of fact, as I can testify to from a 
personal investigation, the food was both good and plentiful, it developed 
that those who complained of its insufficiency were laggards in getting to 
table at mealtime, and their more energetic comrades had helped themselves 
twice to some particularly palatable dish, dessert, or the like. Those who 
complained of the quality of the food plainly had no appetite or were given to 
kicking on general principles. In fine, their table was better set by far than 
any generous interpretation of the law would demand. 

Yet they complained, one after another, day after day, talking always of their 
rights, of what their delegate had told them, of their intention to report to the 
delegate the treatment they were receiving, even threatening to “ get even ” 
with the officers of the ship. 

But they did not confine their activities to making complaints. They went 
further. If any complaint was listened to, any point granted by the ship’s 
officers, they at once seized upon this as an advantage gained over their 
superiors, and they freely talked of the incident as “ putting one over.” And one 
called for another. As an instance, I may cite that of asking to be transferred 
from one watch to another; the first engineer arranges it; and straightway he 
is sneered at as being “easy.” Another man then comes up and demands a 
transfer; it is denied; then he proceeds forthwith to curse his superior and 
call him names. 

Obeying orders is a thing they resisted consistently, from first to last; they 
constantly resented the exercise of authority on the part of the engineers. 




AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 505 


And they loafed on the job. soldiered on every possible occasion, embracing 
every opportunity to neglect their duty when the engineer on watch was absent 
attending to his other duties. They even left their watch deliberately, went to 
their quarters, and turned in at half past 3 in the afternoon, when they were 
expected to remain on watch until 4 o’clock. 

W hen this stage of the game was reached the offenders were hailed before 
the captain and logged. Two days’ pay each was the extent of disciplinary 
action possible under the law. This fine was imposed in a number of cases, some 
of the offenders being brought back again and again, to have another two days’ 
pay charged against them. Still the trouble continued. Logging them seemed to 
move them no more than an elephant would be moved by a broom straw in the 
hands of a child. 

By way of introducing a little variety into their game, they decided to get 
sick, relying upon the fact that no doctor was aboard to declare they were well. 
One would play being sick for a couple of days, then would suddenly get well 
and return to work, giving one of his comrades an opportunity to draw two or 
three days’ pay without rendering any service. 

Another change they rang in was to take advantage of the mess boy by run¬ 
ning in and out of the mess room at all hours of the day—this was done by both 
those on watch and those off watch—to get some coffee and a little something to 
eat, and in doing so they would break into the stores and take whatever they 
felt like taking. 

The steward’s department made up sandwiches for the men on watch during 
the night and would put them in the mess room, locking the door and leaving 
the key with the engineer on watch. Men off duty would break into the mess 
room, by damaging the lock or ripping the door casing or the like, and devour 
the sandwiches. Then the men for whom they were intended would come along,, 
find none of them, and this would be an occasion for another rumpus. 

Such was the program all the way across, without ever a let up—one thing 
after another to make life miserable for the officers of the vessel, to throw more 
work onto the faithful ones, to render the personnel less efficient as a whole, 
and to set the speed of the ship back and so lose money for the operators and 
owners. 

It seems impossible that matters could be worse, but worse they were during 
our stay in the port of Antwerp. The articles provide that no one is to be 
allowed ashore without the permission of the master. This meant nothing to 
these men ; it was a “ mere scrap of paper.” They said so. I have never heard 
so much talk about “ rights ” as these men indulged. But, curiously enough, I 
did not hear, even whispered, the word “ obligation ” or the word “ duty.” 
Only “ rights.” They seemed to be very conversant with the “ rights ” of a man 
aboard an “American ship.” One would conclude from their talk that an 
American ship was a kind of pleasure yacht designed for the exclusive use of 
firemen and coal passers. When we arrived in Antwerp, they at once declared 
themselves free agents, to do as they wished, without any duties whatever; 
all they had to do was to draw money every five days and go ashore to spend 
their time in joy houses and gin mills. 

And their idea prevailed. They drew money, went ashore, got drunk, came 
back when they got ready, some of them after an absence of three or four days. 
Those put on watch deserted their stations, went ashore for one drink, took 
two, three, four; came back the next day, still too drunk to work. Those on 
day work ran across to a water-front dive every little while for a drink; they 
spent most of their time running back and forth, and, at length, tiring of coming 
back, remained ashore, got drunk, turned up when broke. After they sobered up 
a little work would be gotten out of them until the next pay day, then another 
round of exactly the same kind. 

Some of them were brought before the captain and logged. Asked what their 
defense was for leaving their stations, thus jeopardizing the safety of the 
vessel, and possibly delaying the discharging of the cargo through want of 
steam for the winches, they had none; just went over for a drink, took two, 
three, four; got drunk; came back as soon as sober. 

During our stay in port there was more complaint about food. One evening 
at supper we in the officers’ mess were interrupted by the appearance at our 
door of a man from the engine department, who, exhibiting a plate piled high 
with food,, including a piece of rare roast beef that in New York would cost 
75 cents, demanded to know, in injured tones, whether he was a dog or a 
Christian, that he should be given raw beef to eat. The next I heard him he 
was wrangling at the door to the galley, demanding a sirloin steak with 
smothered onions. 


506 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


We had three pay days in Antwerp—July 2, 7, and 12. At every other man 
who stepped up to sign and get his pay there was a delay, a long explanation 
as to why the man could draw no more money than the amount named—i. e., 50 
per cent of the amount earned—then a bit of grumbling, a deal of talk about 
“ rights,” etc. 

Another source of trouble was the disappearance of a man assigned to a given 
watch before the hour to begin the watch came around. Not being on hand, he 
would be noted as absent and another man put in his place. When asked, on 
turning up, for an explanation of his absence, he would state that he had 
arranged with George to stand his watch for him. But George, on being* 
questioned, knew nothing of such an arrangement. All that could be done was 
to log him two days’ pay. 

To add variety, some of the men would go out, get into a tight, get beaten up, 
come back to ship with black eyes, bloody face, an arm bandaged with a hand¬ 
kerchief, a limp in the leg, and, demanding medical attention, lie in bed, a 
charge, but of no use whatever. 

Others, even while on duty, would get into scraps among themselves, charging 
each other with loafing on the job, not doing each his proper share, and the 
like, meanwhile the work suffering. 

When the time came for sailing, the gang had to be rounded up from among 
the joy houses and gin mills and dragged aboard. Once on the ship, they 
refused to stay, but insisted on going ashore for a last drink. The only thing 
that saved us from going out and leaving a lot of them was the fact that they 
were nearly all dead broke, as we sailed on the 17tli and their last pay day 
was the 12th. 

This last pay-day question was the source of still more trouble. Learning 
that the vessel was to sail at 3 p. m. on the 17th, the men came in a body and 
demanded that the captain advance them some money immediately. This he 
refused to do, as, of course, was proper under the law. His refusal disgruntled 
them, and to show their disgruntlement they proceeded forthwith to set a 
limit to the amount of steam which should be obtained on the voyage. The 
limit was very low; on one watch it fell to 145 pounds. They thus delayed the 
vessel very considerably. But for this reprehensible conduct on their part we 
should certainly have arrived in New York one day earlier than is now possible. 

There are many other points that could be mentioned. The foregonig ac¬ 
count merely hits the high spots. There has literally been no end of trouble; 
and it has been continuous, one thing after another in rapid sequence—dis¬ 
gusting to any respectable person, exceedingly trying on the captain in his 
responsibility for the proper handling of.the vessel, and a constant source of 
irritation to the officers immediately in charge of the low, ignorant, degenerate 
class of men who make up crew of the engine department. 

Mr. Scott. I have nothing else now. 

Mr. Hardy. If any of these witnesses wants to be heard in reference 
to the matter brought out by Mr. Thorp in new testimony, I think 
they ought to be allowed the opportunity. 

The Chairman. How long a time do you want? Do you wish to 
be heard in reference to this? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; if I can. 

The Chairman. How long? 

Mr. Furuseth. Not very long. 

%) o * m 

The Chairman. I do not want to stretch this out too long. I have 
neglected business with the departments since this hearing has begun 
and have considerable matters to attend to. 

Mr. Furuseth. It will be short if I may be allowed to go ahead. 

Mr. Hardy. I am afraid we interrupted Mr. Thorp too much with 
questions and prolonged his examination. 

The Chairman. Is there anyone else to be heard besides Mr. Furu¬ 
seth ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I presume not. 

The Chairman. How long a time do you desire ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I will quit any time you want. I will quit right 
now if you wish. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 11 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 507 


The Chairman. I want to give you a chance. How long? 

Mr. Furuseth. I will take as short a time as possible, and it will 
not be very long. 

The Chairman. Very well; proceed and get down to the meat of 
what we want to arrive at on this bill that is before us 

Mr. Furuseth. With reference to weather conditions again, I 
want to suggest that the committee get the weather conditions from 
the Weather Bureau, because there is where you can get it in fact and 
not careful answers to carefully written telegrams. When this bill 
was passed it had before it some reports of disasters. I will read 
some from the Lakes. 

The Chairman. That was included in the report to Congress. 

Mr. Furuseth. It was included in the hearings when the bill was 
passed. It makes altogether what happens on the Lakes less than a 
page in this book. 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Hardy. Instead of reading it give it to the stenographer and 
let it be included. 

Mr. Briggs. Let him read it. 

Mr. Furuseth. I will read from the report that was made up 
from the newspaper accounts, because we could not get it in any 
other way. We took it from the best newspaper accounts that could 
be gotten in the country and spent two months in getting it, news¬ 
paper accounts from the Lakes from the New York Herald in the 
Congressional Library. It was impossible to get it any other way. 

Mr. Scott. Disasters? 

Mr. Furuseth. Disasters; yes. The Lady Elgin , Great Lakes, 
September 8, 1860; there was 287 lives lost. The Keystone , Novem¬ 
ber, 1861, with everybody on board, nobody knows how many. This 
is from 1860 down to 19JL4. 

Mr. Free. Is this on the Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. This is the Lakes I am reading. 

The Chairman. Passengers? 

Mr. Furuseth. Most of these must have been passengers because 
of the tremendous numbers on board. There was the Sunbeam , 
August 28, 1863, 200 persons lost; The Water Witch , November, 
1863, number of persons lost unknown; the City of Detroit , 1863, 20 
persons lost; the St. Clair , 1866, 24 lost; the Morning Star , June 20, 
1868, 26 lost. 

Mr. Scott. Where was the Morning Starf Does it show where she 
operated ? 

Mr. Furuseth. The Morning Star , on the Great Lakes, June, 1868. 
You could not give the whole story there. Then there is the Hippo- 
camus , on the Great Lakes, 1869, 43 lives lost; there is the R. J. Co- 
bum , Great Lakes, 1871, 32 lives lost; Ironsides , Great Lakes, 1873, 
all on board lost; do not know how many; a passenger ship, accord¬ 
ing to reports we had at the time. I remember that. Then there 
was the Waubuna , Great Lakes, 1879, 30 lives lost; then the Amazon , 
Great Lakes, 1879; all on board lost; nobody knows how many. 
Then the Alpena , 1880, 76 lives lost; the Victoria, Great Lakes, 1881, 
an unknown number; passenger ship; the Manistee , Great Lakes, 
1884, 30 lives lost; the Algoma , Great Lakes, 1885, 45 lost; the Asia , 
Great Lakes, 1886, 100 lives lost; the Vernon , Great Lakes, 1886, 55 
lives lost; the Chicora , Great Lakes, January, 1895, 26 lives lost. 


508 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. Does it give the date there? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; it gives the date, January 24, 1895. The 
J. II. Jones , Great Lakes, November 22, 1906, 27 lives lost. The 
Pere Marquette , Great Lakes, September, 1910, 27 lives lost. 

It was impossible for us to get any further facts at the time. We 
did all that we could, but this is not by any means, what we have got 
here, anything like the full amount of losses of life. 

Much has been said about the Eastland here. By the way, I will 
state something. Take the Eastland first. Here is a Government 
report on the Eastland disaster—the whole investigation of it. 
From it it appears that the vessel was built to carry 500 passengers 
and a certain amount of cargo on her lower deck. She was converted 
into a passenger vessel, and at one period she was permitted to carry 
as much as 2,500 passengers. The real reason for her capsizing is; 
that she was top heavy arid overloaded. This comment about the 
vessel being always higher is a new one to me. The higher you 
build a vessel up the higher comes her center, and unless you put pig 
iron in your bottom, a sufficient amount to counteract it—pig iron or 
lead to counteract—of course she capsizes, as where a vessel is up 
carrying her sails. If a mule had been around at the time, God 
help the man who said it. 

Take the question of discipline. Discipline? They want to go 
back, I suppose, to the discipline of years gone by. This book [indi¬ 
cating] is Two Years Before the Mast. It is years since I read the 
book, but I remember something of it, and the statement that I made 
1 bet my fingers that it is in there—that he did not consider himself 
as a good, real able seaman at the time when he left the vessel. 
Here is one of the things that he describes; that is, discipline on 
board of these vessels. “A man was about to be flogged.” Flogging 
a man, they stretch him like this [indicating], tie him to the grating, 
and the cat-o-nine-tails went on his back. What the man was being 
flogged for nobody knew except it was the captain’s pleasure, and 
then one man asked the captain : “ Why do you flog this man ? ” He 
says: “ I will flog you, too. I will flog you for your interference for 
asking the question.” So the man says: “ Can not a man ask a ques¬ 
tion on being flogged.” “ No,” shouted the captain. “ Nobody shall 
open his mouth on board this ship but myself.” Then he took and 
tied him on the grating and flogged him. Then this thing comes 
along. The man, writhing under the pain until he could endure it 
no longer, called out in exclamation: “ Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ.” 
“Do not call on Jesus Christ,” shouted the captain: “He can not 
help you. Call on Frank Thompson.” That is the captain. “ He is 
the man who can help you. Jesus Christ can not help you now.” 
That is so far back in the times that I would not think of quoting 
anything like that, except I brought it here. That is 1837. 

Here is another book. I only show it to you. It is written among 
our sailors, by Mr. Ewell, consul of the United States at Singapore. 
The book is written in 1874. It has got in it things that if you will 
read it, it will run your blood cold. Here is something in a chapter, 
cruelties practiced on seamen, dealing with shanghaied men. That 
book is filled with that stuff. 

We submitted here during discussion of the seamen’s act in years 
gone bv this [indicating]. It is called the “red record.” It is 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 509 

nothing but cases in courts of brutalities, such as you can not de¬ 
scribe. In 1851, flogging was abolished, because it was abolished 
all over the world at that time. There was a wave of humanita- 
rianism running over the world, and they abolished flogging. But 
they left section 5347 of the Revised Statutes as it was. The statute 
abolishing flogging simply said “flogging is hereby abolished.” 
Flogging was stretching a man, tying him to the grating or against 
the rail of a vessel and a man standing over him with a cat-o’-nine 
tails. 

The Chairman. That was 70 years ago. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; before 1851. Then after 1851 men were not 
tied to the grating. 

The Chairman. That was in the days before human slavery was 
abolished. 

Mr. Furuseth. That is not right. After 1851 every one of those 
things took place; every one is reported here. They go back to 
1888, to 1896, or 1897. All this is in the “ red record.” The use of 
the weapon with which to bring a man to time is here told, like the 
belaying pin like a policeman’s night stick, on the head or shoulders 
and on the arms, but usually on the head. A heaver, much heavier 
and stouter than a belaying pin, was used sometimes; caps and bars 
were used, and some things was done that you can not put in print, 
testified to in California in my hearing. On one single vessel leav¬ 
ing—I am not talking now about the Lakes—on one vessel leaving 
136 days from San Pedro, there was not one single day there was not 
blood on her deck. Two men jumped overboard and committed sui¬ 
cide in their desperation. Discipline! Is there anything to hinder 
this man from putting a man in irons out on the Lakes? Nothing 
whatsoever. 

Mr. Gahn. Now, there is not? 

Mr. Furuseth. I say there is nothing to hinder a man from put¬ 
ting a man who disobeys laws on the Lakes in irons. The law gives 
them the authority to do so. 

Mr. Gahn. No; they are within the jurisdiction of every State, 
and there are laws against that. 

Mr. Furuseth. Excuse me, that is not true. You are mistaken. 
The maritime law of the United States runs on the Lakes, and a 
man on the Lakes the moment that a vessel is cast off, the moment 
that her lines are cast off and she is in motion, even if it is on the 
Chicago River, the moment he disobeys orders he is to be put in irons 
until disobedience ceases; if he continues his contumely, he is fed on 
bread and water. 

Mr. Gahn. I do not care what your law is; the State authorities 
would not allow it. 

Mr. Free. Does that happen to-day? 

Mr. Furuseth. They have the power to do it. 

Mr. Free. Do they do it? 

Mr. Furuseth. That is the trouble with them. Why don’t they 
do it? About two years back they took a woman to court for 
mutiny, and it was thrown out: it was too ridiculous. 

Mr. Free. Do you contend that there are abuses of this kind on 
the Lakes now on those boats? 

Mr. Furuseth. As far as using a belaying pin or beating a 
man; no. 


510 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


Mr. Gahn. Or any kind of abuses? 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; plenty of it, if we had the time to bring it, or 
had the opportunity to bring plenty of it. 

Mr. Gahn. I challenge you to name an instance of physical abuse 
on the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. I presume there will be a hearing on this bill when 
it gets over to the Senate committee. By that time I shall have gath¬ 
ered sufficient facts. 

Mr. Gahn. I challenge you to name one instance. 

Mr. Furuseth. Now? 

Mr. Gahn. Yes. 

Mr. Furuseth. I could not name one instance now. I say I know. 
If you ask me if I mean that I was present and saw it, I tell you no. 
But I was not present when Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated nor 
was I present when he died, but I know T he was inaugurated Presi¬ 
dent, and yet I know that he died. 

Mr. Gahn. I challenge you to name a case, whether you have heard 
or seen of it on the Great Lakes, where there was physical abuse. 

Mr. Furuseth. I am not going into that. I can not do that now. 
I will do it by and by. 

The Chairman. Go on with your statement now. 

Mr. Furuseth. I say again that the law furnishes it. The law is 
as plain as anything in the world can be, and it applies to the 
Lakes in every bit of the same v?ny it applies to the ocean for willful 
disobedience at sea. He shall be put in irons and given a month’s im¬ 
prisonment, at the discretion of the court, when he gets ashore. For 
continual disobedience, irons and bread and water; and he can deliver 
his culprit, at any place he gets to when he stops, to the court. He 
will be held there, and then he has got time to furnish his testimony 
and come and complete his charges afterwards. 

Mr. Bankhead. What are you quoting from ? 

Mr. Furuseth. From the seamen’s act, section 6 or 7. It is in the 
Revised Statutes as amended. 

Taking passengers from Duluth to another city, there is a vessel 
goes into Duluth, and the seamen’s act says specifically in section 14— 
I wish these gentlemen from the Lakes would spend a little time with 
the Department of Commerce and help me to get the seamen’s act 
enforced, and two-thirds of their trouble would be abolished in no 
time—that foreign vessels leaving ports of the United States shall 
comply with the rules herein prescribed as to life-saving appliances, 
their equipment, and manning the same; going into Duluth, if she is 
below the equipment and manning, below the American standard, 
she can not leave until the American standard is complied with, if the 
law is carried out. That is the law as made by Congress and by the 
President. 

All I have got to say to you is from the Congressional Record. I 
will quote from memory. There was a thing said by the Vice 
President in the chair. He said: “The bill is before the Senate 
and open to amendment.” He waited. No amendment was offered. 
Then he read the bill the third time, and he read it again, and the 
bill is passed, and the hammer came down. Then about a short 
time afterwards Senator Hoke Smith came up, and whether he came 
from his room or whether he came from dinner would not make any 


AMENDING SECTION'S 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 511 


difference; at any rate lie came up and he raised objections, and he 
asked right then and there for reconsideration of the vote. The vote 
was taken, and a little less than two-thirds voted against reconsidera¬ 
tion the same identical day. All you have got to do is to look at the 
Congressional Kecord and you have it. There is no question of 
veracity; it is there. 

In regard to the strike July 28, 1918, it was on the point of going 
to strike for that improvement of the wages of the men when the 
Shipping Board stepped in and changed the conditions somewhat, 
and as fast as telegrams could be sent out they were sent out, and if 
any vessel was delayed it could not have been for a long time. How¬ 
ever, there is no cure for that, gentlemen, unless you restore the im¬ 
prisonment upon any seaman who violates his contract to labor, and 
that kind of thing lias not existed on the Lakes since 1874. Since 
1874 there never Avas any such thing on the Lakes as imprisonment 
for quitting a vessel in violation of the contract to labor. They tried 
to introduec it there in 1893. 

Mr. Scott. Are you Avilling to incorporate and make your contract 
for the closed ship now, or are you willing to incorporate and make 
a contract with the shipoAvner, and then when the felloAv over Avhom 
you can not exercise control—I realize it would be humanly impos¬ 
sible to get all men of the same character in any organization, but if 
you incorporate so you could carry out your contracts and enter into 
contracts, if a fellow Auolated the rules of your organization you 
could folloAv the procedure that you now folloAv and expel him, and 
liaAdng the closed ship you could keep him from going back to sea. 

Mr. Furuseth. To begin with, do not let us forget there is not 
any such animal as the closed ship. There is not any vessel that has 
got the closed ship anywhere. There is no vessel to-day because 
one or two men quits her that stops. This stuff is gwen you for 
home consumption. Men do not quit A T essels unless some extraordi¬ 
nary trouble occurs in the case of one or two men; the rest do not 
quit on account of that. They could arrest a man when he gets to the 
next port for refusing duty on board ship, throw him into jail, and 
let him stay there until trial takes place, and no man on that ship 
would interfere, ordinarily speaking, and if they were to interfere 
out on the Lakes that would b^ mutiny, and mutiny means 10 years’ 
imprisonment, at least. 

Mr. Bankhead. Is the International Seamen’s Union incorpo¬ 
rated ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Part of it is incorporated. The Eastern and Gulf 
States Association is incorporated. But, gentlemen, for certain pur¬ 
poses you can incorporate. It makes no difference whether you are 
incorporated or not. I want to call your attention to the fact that 
the men come here and complain about the kind of men we got and 
then it is the same kind they had before. To some extent, that is 
true. Necessarily, they must "to some extent be the same men, because 
a man must be to sea or on the Great Lakes a certain length of time 
in order to get an able seamen’s certificate from the inspection de¬ 
partment. We, ourselves, in a statement put into the record in the 
Senate and made into a Senate document by Senator Sutherland, 
and surely to God no one would accuse him of losing his head on 
any question. He put it in the record, and in a statement he said—I 


512 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

will read it—that “ about 50 per cent of the men going to sea are 
the sewage of human societythat all the other classes of men were 
driven away from the sea because of the condition under which sea¬ 
men had to live. 

Everybody else in the United States was free to quit his work. 
After 1867 a seaman was not free to do that in the United States 
until 1899, and not free to quit an American vessel in any other place 
or a foreigner to quit a foreign vessel in an American port until 
1916. Now, when the seamen—and, mind you, in 1899, in the spring 
they arrested about 30 men in Buffalo, and they had to let them go 
because of the law in 1898 absolutely abolished imprisonment; kept 
them in jail overnight and let them go because the law was pulled off. 
If you want an instance of some things on the Lakes, there is one I 
can remember. 

Mr. Scott. Do you deny the testimony that was given to the effect 
that in recent years a contract has been made by the operators with 
the unions ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; certainly not. I do not deny that there have 
been contracts made, but they are not closed-ship contracts. 

Mr. Scott. The contracts will speak for themselves. 

Mr. Furuseth. Certainly. 

Mr. Scott. In that contract you agreed to furnish men and they 
agreed to hire them. 

Mr. Furuseth. Not on your life. 

Mr. Scott. You did not agree to furnish them? 

Mr. Furuseth. No, sir; the contract calls for this, that whenever a 
member of a seamen’s union is employed he shall be employed under 
conditions and at such wages. It is impossible to agree to furnish 
men. You would have to pay enough damages to empty the purse 
of Vanderbilt. I want to say to you again that they have driven to 
sea the sewage of human society because of the treatment that has 
been given to seamen, and because of the condition under which sea¬ 
men had to live the American refused to go to sea. Englishmen 
gradually refused to go to sea. The Norwegian gradually refused 
to go to sea, and so throughout Europe the only persons who increas¬ 
ingly went to sea were the Germans from the interior of the country. 
Those are the actual facts of those things. Just now we are dealing 
with two things in Europe. 

Mr. Free. Let us leave Europe and get down to the Great Lakes. 

The Chairman. Keep to the American line if you can. 

Mr. Furuseth. On that strike, there was no strike. A vessel was 
held up, but a vessel has been held up before there was a union. The 
vessel has been held up before there was a union just as much as since. 

The Chairman. What is there in the present condition that com¬ 
pels the union to carry out its contract ? 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolutely it is the same as the condition that 
compels the shipowner to carry out his—the moral obligation and 
nothing else. 

Mr. Scott. If you made a contract with them to take so many men 
for a certain length of time and he violated that contract, they could 
not recover there. 

Mr. Furuseth. They did that in Illinois in the case of the piano 
workers and could not recover. They did that in the case of another 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 513 


union of Illinois and in the Supreme Court of Illinois the court said 
such kind of a contract is against public policy and nothing is re¬ 
coverable under it. 

Mr. Bankhead. Recoveries of damages have been had against labor 
unions for breach of contract. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; they have recovered from the hatters. 

Mr. Bankhead. And a mining organization in one of the South¬ 
western States got a judgment for $000,000 —the United Mine Work¬ 
ers—and they were incorporated. 

Mr. Furuseth. They w T ere not incorporated. 

Mr. Bankhead. The United Mine Workers of America ? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; they were not incorporated, nor were the ma¬ 
chinists or the hatters. They collected just the same. But you say 
incorporated. What have we got to incorporate? The labor power 
of a human being is not property. The labor power of a human is 
the life of the human being. It is the human being, and your 
thirteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States pre¬ 
cludes any man from being compelled to labor against his will. 

Mr. Scott. That is true, but there are incorporated employment 
bureaus. 

Mr. Furuseth. Yes; sure there are; they simply say they will 
furnish so many men. They can incorporate, of course. Nobody 
goes after them; no trouble with them. They find somebody. We 
are not employment bureaus. We are not a job trust. 

The Chairman. Is there anything else that relates to this bill? 
If there is, get on with it. 

Mr. Furuseth. A gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Thorp, said about 
the Italians that they have Italian bosses who go and bring the men 
every spring and they stay during the summer and they leave in the 
fall. I do not doubt it at all. 

The Chairman. I do not quite hear that. 

Mr. Furuseth. Mr. Thorp testifies they have Italian bosses who 
bring Italians. 

The Chairman. I heard that. What did you say after that? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know about it at all. Iam satisfied that 
it is true, because the boatswain is the padrone, and how much of 
these men’s wages goes to the boss is another question. 

Mr. Bankhead. Does any of it go to him, if you know? That is 
what we would like to know. 

Mr. Furuseth. We have laws on the statute books forbidding it; 
had to pass laws forbidding to take seamen’s wages from them. Of 
course, you can not enforce those laws unless the men are willing to 
testify. You have laws right in this book. 

Mr. Scott. Section 7. 

Mr. Furuseth. In which it is prohibited by law from taking any 
of the seamen’s money for finding employment. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do they as a general practice still take it? 

Mr. Furuseth. Certainly they do. The Italians have boarding 
houses in New York, from which those people in a few years have, 
from nothing, got up to half a million dollars invested, after 15 or 16 
years’ keeping of sailors’ boarding houses and furnishing men to 
vessels. 

Mr. Scott. You do not mean that the companies pay this? 

48420—21-33 


514 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. If you say this company—if you mean this com- 
pany—I will say no; I do not know. If you say shipping companies, 
yes; I say I do know. 

Mr. Scott. Where? On the Great Lakes? 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not say on the Lakes on that question because 
I do not know; but I say shipping companies get part of that 
money, and sworn testimony to that effect was given to the committee 
on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries when Grosvenor of Ohio was 
chairman of the committee. 

The Chairman. That was many years ago. 

Mr. Furuseth. It continues yet, Mr. Chairman, to some extent. 

Mr. Scott. It is a fact that on the Great Lakes men employed on 
ships get their time and go to the purser and get their money—each 
one of them—and they sign a receipt for it. 

Mr. Furuseth. I do not know what they do on the Lakes with ref¬ 
erence to that, because I am not sailing on the Lakes and have taken 
very little interest in the Lakes. 

Mr. Scott. You were talking about this particular company. 

Mr. Furuseth. I will say about these particular Italians that in 
all probability the boatswain was the padrone. 

The Chairman. That has been repeated. Get down to something 
else. 

Mr. Scott. It is so indirect, a probability or a possibility. I ask 
you if you have any proof that this owner was charging tribute ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I say if I had direct proof I would have him ar¬ 
rested under the law. 

Mr. Scott. Sure. 

Mr. Furuseth. Having nothing but indirect proof I have not been 
able to do it yet. 

Mr. Scott. It seems to me that sort of statement by imputation 
ought not to be made unless you have some proof. 

The Chairman. Go on with your testimony to finish the business. 
Do not get into those wild notions that you say you know nothing 
about. 

Mr. Furuseth. No; I do not. In conclusion, gentlemen, I am 
pretty' near through with this, thank God. In conclusion, I again 
want to say this, that these shipowners have given testimony here 
for years about the condition of safety on the Great Lakes. In some 
instances their business was cut in two because of their own testimony, 
because attention was called to the real facts. The board of education 
of the city of Chicago investigated whether the men could handle 
lifeboats and when they had investigated they came to the conclusion 
that it was dangerous to let the school children go on the boats at all. 
I have not the report here because I did not think of bringing it. I 
will get it some other time at some other place, probably. It is a 
resolution that was adopted. 

These gentlemen, and I want to warn them honestly, if we wanted 
to do it, these two men sitting here and I could pick out the testimony 
of the shipowners themselves from the congressional investigations 
and from the testimony given before the courts, publish it in little 
flyleaves and scatter it around to the Lake cities and their passenger 
trade would end; practically end. 

Mr. Maclean. So would your jobs. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 515 

Mr. Furuseth. My dear sir, my job is of no consequence to any¬ 
body, even to me. I can make just as much money going to sea as I 
do now, in spite of my poor eyes, and I will never ask any man for a 
job. That kind of a sneer ! 

Mr. Scott. You evidently think that statement was made by me. 

Mr. Maclean. I am perfectly responsible for it. So would your 
jobs. 

Mr. Scott. The statement was not made by Mr. Maclean in a cap¬ 
tious way. 

Mr. Furuseth. And so would your jobs. 

Mr. Scott. He said the moment the ship stop all the jobs stop. 
That is actually true. 

Mr. Furuseth. I said in answer to that, so much better for the men 
themselves. Then they go to something else. 

Mr. Scott. Did you say that the school boards of the various towns 
at Chicago had prevented the school children, from going on ships? 

Mr. Furuseth. No; I said that the school board of the city of 
Chicago made an investigation into the manning of vessels carrying 
school children out of Chicago and they reported back that the men 
employed were utterly unfit to handle boats or to have those chil¬ 
dren intrusted to their hands. 

Mr. Scott. When was this ? 

Mr. Furuseth. 1914, I think. I am not absolutely sure of that. 
In 1914 or 1913; it was one of the times when there was so much dis¬ 
cussion about the safety on the Lakes and at sea. 

Mr. Scott. You do not know what ship they were investigating ? 

Mr. Furuseth. They investigated several ships. 

Mr. Scott. Will you tell the committee the names of the ships they 
were investigating ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I have not any records. 

Mr. Scott. You are presuming to testify on some specific instances, 
and I am anxious to find out what they were. There is no way of 
answering it. 

Mr. Furuseth. I did not state the specific ship. I said they in¬ 
vestigated the ships. 

Mr. Scott. Have you a copy of the report ? 

Mr. Furuseth. I have not got it here, but I can have it. I did not 
think of bringing it here. 

Mr. Scott. You are testifying about a report that no member of 
the committee has seen. 

Mr. Bankhead. Will you furnish it for the record? 

Mr. Furuseth. Absolutely; I can furnish it. 

Mr. Bankhead. Then furnish it for the record. 

The Chairman. Is that all ? 

Mr. Furuseth. As far as I am concerned; yes, sir. 

Mr. Bankhead. Is there any considerable number of these able- 
bodied seamen, who have served on the Great Lakes who are mar¬ 
ried men or men with families? 

Mr. Furuseth. Out of all the members of able seamen that we 
have on record, which is something like 40,000, including able seamen 
on the Lakes and ocean, less than 4 per cent are married men. 

Mr. Bankhead. Have you testified any on the proposition of the 
extra hazards charged against those employed on the Lakes by the 
Jife insurance companies? If you have, I will withdraw the question. 


516 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ’s ACT. 

Mr. Furuseth. So great is that that I never knew a man who in¬ 
sured his life as a sailor because the premium is so forbidding. I 
have not got the exact figures. It is so much so that I, as a matter of 
fact, until I talked with somebody else, did not think that they would 
take sailors at all. That was my impression and conviction until 
one of the men here told me that some on the Lakes had tried it and 
that they would take sailors but on an extraordinary high premium. 
There is no life so hazardous known at all as the seamen’s. 

Mr. Bankhead. That is all. 

Mr. Scott. In view of the testimony that has been given by Mr. 
Furuseth, I want to incorporate in the record the navigation laws 
of the United States, the last published, 1919, on pages 324-325, 
where there appears an act signed by the President on June 20, 1874, 
as follows (I will only read that section which is particularly appli¬ 
cable to the subject matter) : 

Whenever the manager, owner, or agent of any vessel of the United States 
has reason owing to nonappearance of such vessel or to any other circumstance 
to apprehend that such vessel has been lost he shall, as soon as conveniently 
may be, send notice in writing to the collector of customs of the port to which 
said vessel belongs of such loss and probable occasion therefor, list of names, 
and official number of the vessel, the names of all persons on board, so far as 
the same can be ascertained, and shall furnish upon request of the collector of 
such port such additional information as he may be able to, and if he neglects 
to comply with the above requirement within a reasonable time he shall incur 
a penalty of $100. It shall be the duty of the collector of customs to imme¬ 
diately transmit to the Secretary of the Treasury such report and information. 

Those reports have been going into the customs department since 
1874 in accordance with the law. They are transmitted through the 
customs department to the Coast Guard Service and to the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce. Those reports, official in character, become a 
part of the Supervising Inspector General’s report made each year. 
In view of the fact that the statement has been made that in conse¬ 
quence of improper conduct on the part of operators that the travel¬ 
ling public has been cut in two in number, I submit the following 
tabulation selected from the reports of the Supervising Inspector 
General of the United States commencing on June 30, 1910, and end¬ 
ing on June 30, 1920. I will incorporate these exactly if the com¬ 
mittee wish it. 

Mr. Bankhead. What is it—the number of passengers carried? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Bankhead. On the Lakes? 

Mr. Scott. On the Lakes. In 1910 there were 14,957,563 pas¬ 
sengers carried. There were 100 lives lost; and with the then ex¬ 
isting life-saving devices on board ships there were saved 153 persons. 
During the year the number of passengers lost in wrecks, or founders, 
collisions, fire, or any other cause except suicide was none. In 1911 
there were 16,673,83*4 passengers carried. The number of persons 
on passenger and freight ships who lost their lives during that year 
was 27 by wreck and founder and 23 by collision, none by fire; a 
total of 50. No passengers lost. With the life-saving appliances 
then in existence and then used on board ships there were 79 lives 
saved. In 1912 there were 16,794,722 passengers carried on the Great 
Lakes. There were 11 persons on both passenger and freight ships 
who were lost by wreck or founder, 14 by collision, and none by fire. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 517 

The total number of passengers lost that year from any cause except 
suicide was none. I mean to say that was equally true through all 
the other years; that the then (1912) life-saving appliances that 
there were on board ship saved 100 by means of the life-saving ap¬ 
pliances required by the Department of Commerce. 

In 1913 the report of the Supervising Inspector General appears 
to have been incomplete. It does not give the total number of pas¬ 
sengers carried during the year as it does in the others, I should 
say. On page 13 of the Supervising Inspector General’s report in 
the year 1913, that takes it down to June 30, 1913, he reports that 
there were no disasters on the Great Lakes during that fiscal year 
from June 30, 1912, until June 30, 1913. His report is so incomplete 
in that respect I am endeavoring, but have been unable, to get the 
figures indicating the number of passengers who were lost; it was 
so small that lie does not carry it in his tabulation of other years. 
It does not seem conceivable that there was not a life lost on the Great 
Lakes during that year, and I can not bring myself to believe that, 
but I am going to the Customs Department and also to the Coast 
Guard Service in order that I may make correction to that report, 
which appears to be incomplete. 

In 1914 the passengers carried on the Great Lakes were 17,221,458. 
The persons lost on both passenger and freight vessels by wreck 
and foundering were 177, by collision 1, by fire none. The num¬ 
ber of passengers lost on all passenger lines operating on the 
Great Lakes during the year 1914 was none. Persons employed 
on ships, both passenger and freight, saved by the life-saving 
appliances required by the Department of Commerce during that 
year were 98. In 1915, passengers carried were 16,598,707. Pas¬ 
sengers and crew lost by foundering or wrecks during that year 
were 44; passengers and crews loss of life by reason of collision, 
none; by fire, none; number of lives saved by life-saving devices 
required by the Department of Commerce during that year, 16. Loss 
of passengers on the Great Lakes by passenger vessels—and you 
understand that means ferries, too—none. In 1916 the number of 
passengers carried were 16,624,086. The number of passengers and 
crew lost by reason of wreck or foundering were 836; by reason of 
collision, none; fire, none. Lives saved by life-saving devices re¬ 
quired by the Department of Commerce, 65. Out of these 836 per¬ 
sons 811 were passengers and 25 were members of the crews of 
freight-carrying ships. 

Mr. Gahn. Does that include the seamen? 

Mr. Scott. Seamen, passengers 812. 

Mr. Gahn. That was in the river? 

Mr. Scott. In the river; subtracting that from the 836 makes 24 
persons who lost their lives from all causes, wreck and foundering, 
collision, and fire, during that year. In 1917 passengers carried were 
17,402,961; lives lost by wreck or foundering, 48; by collision, 19; 
by fire, none; lives saved by life-saving devices, 127; passengers who 
lost their lives, 18. 

Mr. Gahn. That was the year of the Christopher Columbus dis¬ 
aster on the Milwaukee River? 

Mr. Scott. Of the 18 passengers who were lost during that year 
and charged to this mortality table, 15 lost their lives on board the 


518 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Christopher Columbus . On June 30, 1917, the report of the super¬ 
vising inspector general commenting on the accident described it 
as having occurred in the river at Milwaukee, and as the vessel was 
winding her bow struck a steel structure about 100 feet high on the 
wharf, causing a large water-sprinkling system to topple over and 
crush the pilot house and upper decks and killing 15 persons. The 
accident was caused by high water and extremely strong current 
in both rivers at the time. So that accounts for 15 of 18 passengers 
that lost their lives. In 1918 they carried 16,075,933 passengers. 
The number of passengers who lost their lives by reason of wreck 
or by foundering was 64; in collision, 119; by fire, 14. Persons saved 
by life-saving devices on board ship at the time, 49. Number of 
passengers who lost their lives during 1918 in passenger service or 
ferry, none. In 1919 the total number of passengers carried was 
14,594,144; the number of persons who lost their lives by wreck or 
foundering, 78; by collision, 105; number by fire, 7. Number of 
persons whose lives were saved, 17; number of passengers whose 
lives were lost on the Great Lakes that year, none. 

In 1920 the number of passengers carried was 18,933,681. The 
number of persons who lost their lives by wreck or foundering, 80; 
by collision, 112; by fire, 17; a total of 209. The number of persons 
whose lives were saved by life-saving devices was 73. The number 
of passengers who were lost was 17. 

Mr. Briggs. These records relate only to American ships, ships 
of American registry? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Jefferts. It takes in the ocean as well? 

Mr. Scott. The report on the ocean is covered in an abbreviated 
form, if you wish me to put it in. 

Mr. Bankhead. I do not think that is pertinent. 

Mr. Jefferis. This which you are reading is on the Great Lakes 
exclusively. 

Mr. Scott. Yes; passengers carried on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Bankhead-. I have no objection to the ocean percentages 
going in. 

Mr. Scott. Now, on the 1920, in which 17 passengers’ lives are 
chargeable, the supervising inspecting general, on page 15, has the 
following to say: 

On October 28, 1919, it was about 4.20 a. m. when the steamer Muskegon, 
at the northwestern corner of the south border at the entrance of Muskegon 
Harbor during the cold and heavy sea, foundered, resulting in the total ioss 
of the'ship and the loss of 23 lives. 

Of the 23 lives in the table above, the statement which I just 
read, chargeable to passengers, is 17, so that I have made my tabu¬ 
lation of the 17 passengers from that statement. 

Evidently 17 of the 23 persons who lost their lives were pas¬ 
sengers on board the ship, leaving 6 of the crew who evidently lost 
their lives, and that is verified in the report which I have just 
referred to as 6 person of the crew. 

Mr. Bankhead. Are you through with the figures? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Bankhead. What inference do you wish us to draw from that 
tabulation ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 519 

Mr. Scott. In view of the comment that was made here by Mr. 
Furuseth as to the number of lives actually lost running up into 
the thousands back in the old days when we were operating wooden 
ships, and his reports were not directed at particularly whether it 
was passenger or freight, I have attempted in this report to cover a 
period of 10 years—5 years before the law went into effect and 5 
years after the law went into effect—in order that this committee 
may know exactly the number of lives lost before the law went into 
effect and afterwards. 

Between 1915 and 1916 the law was in process of being enforced 
and it really was not chargeable to either account because they 
were just making the transfer. Taking the five years before 1915, 
to wit, 1910, 1911, 1912, 1913, and 1914, the total number of per¬ 
sons who lost their lives by wreck, foundering, collision, or fire, 
or any reason incidental to navigation for the five years prior to 
the adoption of this law, was 353. For the five years after the law 
went into effect, not counting 1915 or 1916, but after the law was 
firmly in effect, to wit, 1917, 1918, 1919, and 1920, for four years 
after the law as against five years before the law went into effect, 
they lost 663 persons. 

Mr. Bankhead. How many of those were on the Eastland? 

Mr.. Scott. None. The 663 constitute the number that were lost 
after the Eastland disaster occurred because the Eastland disaster 
occurred in summer after the law became operative in the fall and 
they were just then transforming their ship and getting their equip¬ 
ment in accordance with the law. For the six years 1910, 1911, 1912, 
1913, and 1914 and 1915, which was prior to the law, because this 
report only goes up to June, 1915, there was not a single passenger 
lost out of approximately 96,000,000 persons who were carried during 
those six years. 

There was not a single passenger who lost his life by wreck, 
foundering, collision, or fire. There were a few passengers who lost 
their lives in consequence of suicide, and not a single passenger dur¬ 
ing those entire five years lost out of a passenger ship in consequence 
of a wreck, collision, or fire on board ship. After that time, ex¬ 
cluding the Eastland disaster, which was in the river at the time, 
and certainly ought not to be charged to the operation of the ship, 
because it was tied up at the dock, for the last four years 1917, 1918, 
1919, and 1920 there have been only 35 passengers who have actually 
lost their lives out of a passenger carrying capacity of between 
60,000,000 and 70,000,000 people. 

Mr. Jefferis. Would that term, for instance, include storms? 

Mr. Scott. It includes every life lost while on the ship or in 
navigation. If there was a storm and a man lost overboard that 
would be chargeable to the operation of the ship. 

Mr. Bankhead. I understand that the final analysis of your deduc¬ 
tions is to the effect that additional life-saving equipment has been 
of no real value? 

Mr. Scott. The figures speak for themselves. 

Mr. Bankhead. I just want your statement. I am not attempt¬ 
ing to examine you. I just want your views on it. 

That showing of carrying of passengers with a minimum of fatali¬ 
ties impresses me as a very remarkable record. 


520 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. I did not intend to let that rest with simply this report, 
which is just as authentic as it possibly could be; but I have asked 
the Coast Guard Service to furnish me their reports, and I expected 
to have them here to-day, but I called up my office a moment ago 
and the} 7 had not come down. Then I called up the Secretary of the 
Treasury, and he referred me to the Customs Division. I called up 
the Customs Division, and they told me that these reports came in. 
but they made no tabulation of them themselves; that the original 
reports made by the collector of customs at the various ports were in 
compliance with this provision of the statute passed in 1874 com¬ 
pelling the report to the collector of customs at each port on the part 
of owners or operators of ships, and these reports came in and 
went through largely in a perfunctory manner and the originals 
were in the Coast Guard Service. I am attempting to verify that 
by the Coast Guard, and in that connection I hope to have here this 
afternoon, in order that it might be contained as a part of the 
record, the exact location of the 62 life-saving stations on the Great 
Lakes, their present personnel, and the amount of equipment that 
they are using. My purpose in having that is to show that the 62 
life-saving stations stretch all along the shore—to show the distance 
between each one. 

Mr. Chindbeom. Do you want to put those figures in the record 
later as to the Coast Guard stations? 

Mr. Scott. I expect to have those Coast Guard stations, which is 
simply a map; there certainly could not be any question in the way 
of disputing it, as the Coast Guard Service ought to know where their 
stations are, and they are going to send me a map and a book showing 
where each one of those stations are, the number of men in the sta¬ 
tions, the number of life-saving boats in operation, and the charac¬ 
ter of the boats that are in operation at each one of the stations, and 
the distance between the various stations up and down the Lakes. I 
assume that. I do not know as it will be necessary to put that in the 
testimony. What do you think about that, Mr. Bankhead? 

Mr. Bankhead. I have no objection to that. 

Mr. Scott. I thought I would have it all here fehis afternoon. 

Mr. Bankhead. There will be no dispute about the location of the 
life-saving stations, I presume. 

Mr. Scott. The Coast Guard Service ought to know. 

Mr. Bankhead. Just one question for my information. Figuring 
the number of passenger ships per those tabulations which you have 
introduced, does that include the number of passengers carried ex¬ 
clusively on the Lakes or on the rivers adjacent to the Lakes and 
sounds and harbors? 

Mr. Scott. We have no sounds on the Lakes nor bays. As far as 
the Great Lakes are concerned, the only exception under which Ave 
are permitted to operate is the rivers. We have no sounds or bays 
within the interpretation of the statute. 

Mr. Bankhead. Do those figures you have offered include the num¬ 
ber of passengers carried exclusive of those carried on the body of 
the Lakes or carried on streams ? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN ? S ACT. 521 


Mr. Scott. Carried on the Great Lakes and the rivers. 

Mr. Bankhead. Vessels of any character? 

Mr. Scott. Vessels of all character. 

Mr. Bankhead. Pleasure yachts ? 

Mr. Scott. No; it only covers registered passenger ships. 

Mr. Gahn. Steamboats? 

Mr. Scott. The statement I read from the Supervising Inspector 
General’s report—■“ Statement of loss of lives and the number of 
passengers carried on vessels subject to inspection.” 

Mr. Bankhead. A ferryboat crossing the river is subject to in¬ 
spection according to the law ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; ferryboats are subject to inspection. You mean 
ferryboats between Detroit and Windsor? 

Mr. Bankhead. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Undoubtedly. 

Here is a telegram directed to the chairman of the committee, 
Hon. William S. Greene. It is dated Cleveland, May T, and reads 
as follows: 

Hon. William S. Greene, 

Chairman Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

The executive committee of the Perry’s Victory Memorial Commission, repre¬ 
senting six States bordering on the Great Lakes and the States of Ithode 
Island and Kentucky, in session here to-day, unanimously indorsed the Scott 
amendment to the La Follette Seamen’s Act. 

Webster P. Huntington, Secretary. 

Mr. Bankhead. What commission is that, Mr. Scott? 

Mr. Scott. I only know in a general way. It was a commission 
that was appointed to commemorate Perry’s victory on Lake Erie. 

Mr. Gahn. They built a monument after the fashion of the Wash¬ 
ington Monument on Put in Bay Island. 

Mr. Scott. I think that is all I care to introduce. 

Mr. Briggs. Do those statistics you have there show the number 
of ships that were in disasters? 

Mr. Scott. The number of ships ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes; with the names, etc. 

Mr. Scott. It does not, except in a general way. I did not want to 
tire the committee. I selected only what I thought were the vital 
matters; but if you wish to go into the details of the proposition it is 
a very simple matter, because I worked that out myself. 

Mr. Briggs. I thought that if you had it there it could be read into 
the record. 

Mr. Scott. It is not incorporated in that way. The way the 
Supervising Inspector General handles his reports touching those 
matters is this: He goes on to show the accidents, and says: 

The loss of life was due largely to the following disasters: 

July 12, 1909, during a dense fog, a collision occurred between the steamers 
John B. Cowl and Isaac M. Scott off Whitefisli Point, Lake Superior. Three 
minutes after the collision tlie John B. Corel sunk, carrying with her 14 mem¬ 
bers of her crew, who were drowned. 

That accounts for 14. 

Mr. Briggs. Where is that taken from? 

Mr. Scott. That is taken from the Supervising Inspector Gen¬ 
eral’s report of 1910. 


522 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 


Mr. Chindblom. Will it be necessary to read such a report as 
to each accident? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom. I do not see that that gives us any more light 
than we have. 

Mr. Scott. That is the reason I have refrained from reading them. 
I read them all myself in order to reverify my figures and to insure 
their being absolutely correct. 

Mr. Briggs. What I was speaking about was the ships, rather 
than- 

Mr. Scott. Yes; it gives the names of the ships. 

Mr. Briggs. I do not think your figures before covered the ships. 
You covered, I think, the number of lives lost, but not the number of 
ships, or anything of that kind, or the circumstances. 

Mr. Scott. Well, if you want the names of the ships in the ac¬ 
cidents, there was a collision and only one ship was lost. In 1910 
the five ships that sank during that year were all freight vessels. 

Mr. Briggs. What were their names? Have you got them there? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; the Cowl, the Clarion , the Marquette, and Besse¬ 
mer No. 2, and the Frank H. Goodyear. 

Mr. Briggs. Hoes that give the circumstances, just as in the other 
cases ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I wish you would read that. I would like to hear that. 
I just want to get some idea. 

Mr. Scott (reading) : 

On December 8, about 7 o’clock, the freight steamer Clarion, when about a 
mile north of Southeast Shoal Lightship on Lake Erie, was discovered to be on 
fire between decks. A heroic effort was made to subdue the fire with the steam 
fire apparatus and fire hose, but without avail. The crew took to the boats, 
one of which contained 13 men. which was never heard from. One of the crew 
lost his life attempting to subdue the fire. Another was lost from one of the 
lifeboats, making a total of 15 lives lost. 

On December 7 the Marquette and Bessemer No. 2 left Conneaut, Ohio, at 
10.25 a.m. bound for Port Stanley, Ontario. A heavy gale, with snow and sleet, 
occurred for several days after she left. The steamer was never reported. 
One of the steamer’s lifeboats, with the dead bodies of several of the crew, 
was picked up by a tug. That was all that w r as ever known of the steamer. 
The owners reported that 30 men were lost. 

On May 23 the steamers Frank II. Goodyear and James B. Wood collided on 
Lake Huron below Thunder Bay Island, in a dense fog, and the Frank H. Good¬ 
year sank. Only 5 of her crew of 23 were saved, 18 lives being lost. 

Mr. Briggs, Those are the occurrences of 1910 ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I wish you would read the other years. 

Mr. Gahn. Were they all freight boats? 

Mr. Soott. They were all freight boats. 

Mr. Briggs. You are taking now the report of 1911? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. In 1910 there was only one ship that was sunk by 
reason of operations and on which any lives were lost at all—well, 
that were sunk at all because of a disaster. 

On September 9 the steamer Pere Marquette No. 18, from Luding- 
ton, bound for Milwaukee, with a cargo of 29 loaded cars, sank from 
some unknown cause. TAventy-seven lives were lost, many being 
killed by the sea and floating wreckage. That is a car ferry that 
carries only freight cars from one terminal of the railroad to the 
opposite terminal over on the Milwaukee side. 



AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 523 


Mr. Briggs. That was the only disaster during that year? 

Mr. Scott. That was the only disaster during that year, in which 
there were 27 lives lost. That is 1911. 

On September 2, 1911, the steamer Philip Minch , while entering 
Toledo Harbor straight channel, came into collision with the gaso¬ 
line motor pleasure boat, the Nemo The launch had eight occu¬ 
pants, seven of whom were drowned. * 

That is the only one that is carried in the report of the inspector 
general during that year, although in my tabulation I have 11 
charged, so evidently there were four that were either washed over¬ 
board or some other similar accident that is not carried. It was not 
a wreck or anything of that kind. 

Mr. Briggs. It is not carried in that section of the report? 

Mr. Scott. No; it was simply a loss of life incident to navigation. 

Mr. Briggs. What is this report you are reading from now, 1913? 

Mr. Scott. I am reading from 1913 now. 

Mr. Briggs. All of these are for the fiscal year ending June 30? 

Mr. Scott. In 1913, although the Supervising Inspector General 
starts out his report by saying: “The following disasters resulted 
in an unusually large loss of life,” an examination of his compila¬ 
tions in his report disclose the fact that all of the lives that were 
lost that year were lost on the ocean. He has not charged or men¬ 
tioned in his report a single accident on the Great Lakes, and in 
my report I charge no losses to the Great Lakes. That is the one 
that I said to you a short time ago in making my statement I did 
not think was accurate. 

Mr. Briggs. You think there were some inaccuracies? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; there must be some inaccuracies, although you 
understand that this report, although it is chargeable to 1913, only 
goes up to June 30,1913, so really it is from June, 1912, to June, 1913, 
and does not take in the calamity that fall which has been mentioned 
by the witnesses. That will appear in 1914. 

In 1914 this statement appears : 

During an extremely severe storm, which raged with uncommon fury on all 
the Great Lakes, particularly on Lake Huron, November 9 to 10, 1913, the fol¬ 
lowing steamers with their entire crews foundered, resulting in the loss of 161 
lives: Henry B. Smith, Argus, Hydrus, Charles S. Price, John A. McGean, Isaac 
M. Scott, William, Nottingham, and James H. Martin. 

Mr. Gahn. Freight boats? 

Mr. Scott. All freight boats, with a loss of 161 lives. That is the 
only accident which the Supervising Inspector General reports. 

Mr. Briggs. What are the circumstances Are they given in the 
report ? 

Mr. Scott. They do not say anything about this particular ac¬ 
cident. 

Mr. Briggs. Do they give the time of the year of those occurrences ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; that was on November 9 and 10, 1913. That 
was described here, Mr. Briggs. I do not know whether you were 
here or not. I do not know whether it was a typhoon or what it was 
that came up. It is something that never occurred before and has 
has never occurred since. 

I know my statement is absolutely correct. I know because I was 
right on the Lakes at the time—I was not out on the Lakes, but I 
was living on the shore of the Lakes at the time, and, of course, that 


524 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN*S ACT. 

information came in, and it is very fresh in my memory, very vivid. 

Mr. Briggs. What was the character of these vessels, wood or steel ! 

Mr. Scott. Some of them were steel and some of them wood. 
About two of them were steel and the other three were wood. It did 
not make any difference whether they were wood or steel on that 
occasion. 

Mr. Briggs. The storm was too severe ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; because it took those vessels right up and turned 
them upside down. The whole storm was within a radius of 10 or 15 
miles outside of the lightship, which is 5 miles off the mouth of the 
St. Clair River, right off of Port Huron. All the disasters occurred 
south of Lexington, which is 25 miles north of Port Huron. I think 
you will find that within a radius of that space is where the accidents 
occurred. 

Mr. Gahx. The passenger boats do not run through there that late 
in the season, do they ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; in 1915 we had passenger boats running. On that 
night, when this storm occurred, the steamer City of Alpena , which 
is named after my home town, came down the lake and had a notifica¬ 
tion from the Weather Bureau, as she always does at every port, in¬ 
dicating the storm signals and what the prospect of the weather is in 
the next leg of her voyage. She got a report that an intense storm 
of unusual furjr would rage that night, and she laid at Harbor Beach 
and did not go out until the storm had subsided, and then she went 
out and made Port Huron. So that we were right at that very second 
operating passenger vessels on the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Gahn. Has it been explained in this hearing about the weather 
service on the Great Lakes and how they telegraph ahead to the 
vessels ? 

Mr. Briggs. You are going to file a statement from the weather 
service showing that for some years back ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. Briggs. I think that would be a good idea, just as the Congress¬ 
man suggests. 

Mr. Scott. On November 19, 1914, the steamer Curtis , with the 
barges Marvin and Annie M. Peterson in tow, encountered a storm 
of unusual violence, with the result that the steamer and barges 
foundered in the vicinity of Grande Marais, Mich. Grand Marais, 
Mich., is on Lake Superior, about 100 miles north of the Sault. The 
crew of all three vessels, a total of 28 persons, lost their lives. That 
is a freight vessel on Lake Superior, and I may say in that connec¬ 
tion that, as a matter of justice, as a matter of fairness to the situa¬ 
tion—I think everybody will agree to this statement—as far as the 
danger on the Great Lakes is concerned, Lake Superior is by far the 
most dangerous. 

That is the only accident that the Supervising Inspector General 
reports for the year ended June 30,1915, a loss of 28 lives, as charge¬ 
able to any calamity at all—one ship sunk. 

In 1916 the Eastland disaster is reported, with a loss of 812 lives. 
That is the only disaster. 

Mr. Briggs. What did the Supervising Inspector General say about 
that ? There has been so much testimony on that here that I think it 
would be interesting to have his report incorporated in the record. 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 525 


Mr. Scott (reading) : 

On July 24.1915, the passenger excursion steamer Eastland, while lying at her 
(lock at Clark Street, Chicago, Ill., loaded with 2,500 passengers, rolled over on 
her side, resulting in 811 of the passengers and 1 of the crew, a total of 812 
persons, losing their lives. This disaster was the subject of a special investiga¬ 
tion, which was in the personal charge of the Secretary of Commerce, and 
resulted in a special inquiry into the inspection conditions on the Great Lakes 
by a committee of supervising inspectors, the members of which were selected 
by the Secretary. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that report contained in the- 

Mr. Scott. In this report ? 

Mr. Briggs. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. No; because at the time this book was issued this com¬ 
mission had not made their report, and the report was made to the 
Secretary. 

Mr. Briggs. That is the 1916 report? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; ending June 30,1916. That investigation was the 
following summer. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that carried in the next report—in the report for 
1917? 

Mr. Scott. No ; the Supervising Inspector General would not carry 
the result of that investigation, because it was a very long investi¬ 
gation, and there were a great many witnesses sworn. 

Mr. Briggs. I thought perhaps he might have a summary of it 
or something of that kind. 

Mr. Gahn. Can you not give us somethng from your own knowl¬ 
edge, Mr. Scott, as to how that happened? 

Mr. Briggs. I thought that inasmuch as they made a special in¬ 
quiry for the Secretary of Commerce that he would have it right 
there. 

Mr. Gahn. I know that at the time it was generally supposed that 
she listed away from her dock on a very warm day. The passengers 
were getting on and the dead lights were opened by some of the 
crew down below to get some fresh air. They opened them on the 
opposite side of the dock, and there was a fire on the river which 
caused the fireboats to go by and that caused the passengers to go on 
the outer side of the boat, which caused her to roll that way and the 
dead lights to take in water, and the more water they took in the 
farther the boat rolled, and she sank. Those on the other side 
were not thrown into the matter. 

Mr. Scott. That is the only accident that was reported that year. 
There were 812 lives lost. 

Mr. Briggs. That is for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1916? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Now, in 1917 the steamer James B. Colgate and the Merida foun¬ 
dered during a heavy gale in Lake Erie, resulting in the loss of 24 
of the crew of the former and the entire crew of 23 persons of the 
latter vessel. That was on October 20, 1916. Both of these vessels 
were freighters. 

Mr. Briggs. Does it show where they foundered ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; they foundered in Lake Erie. 

Mr. Gahn. In Canadian waters? 

Mr. Scott. On June 30, 1917, the steamer Christo flier Columbus 
had her accident in the Milwaukee River. I read that just a few 


526 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OE THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 


minutes ago about when they hit her water tower, and it came down 
on the deck of the ship and killed 15 passengers. Those two acci¬ 
dents are the only accidents recorded by the Supervising Inspector 
General during that year. Those two accidents almost account for 
the entire number of lives that I credited in my previous tabulation. 

In 1918 the steamer Desmond , while enroute from St. Joe, Mich., to 
Racine, Wis., loaded with sand, was driven out of her course by a 
storm, and while endeavoring to enter the harbor at South Chicago 
took in so much water over the side that she foundered, resulting in 
seven of her crew losing their lives. That is the only accident that he 
reports. 

Mr. Briggs. That was the only one in 1918 ? 

Mr. Scott. That is the only one he mentions in 1918. I do not know 
whether this next one is chargeable to the Great Lakes or not. It does 
not show where the accident occurred. 

On December 9, 1917, the barge Lancaster , in tow of the steamer 
Georges Greek , foundered during a severe storm off Winterquarter 
Light Vessel, resulting- 

Mr. Briggs. Where is that ? 

Mr. Scott. I do not know. Winterquarter Light Vessel might 
apply to any of them. I never heard of it, but it might be possible 
that they have a light vessel up on the Great Lakes known as the 
Winterquarter Light Vessel. 

Mr. Thorp. No there is not, Mr. Scott. 

Mr. Scott. Then that is not chargeable to the Great Lakes. 

Mr. Briggs. These men say they know of no such light. 

Mr. Scott. Now, in 1918, the only catastrophe he carries there is on 
the Illinois River, in which the Columbia hit the right bank of the 
river, with the result that the steamer sank, causing the loss of 87 lives. 

Mr. Gahn. The Illinois River is where? 

Mr. Scott. It does not say where it is. 

Mr. Gahn. That does not run into the Great Lakes, does it? 

Mr. Williams. That is a Mississippi River steamer, is it not? 

Mr. Scott. That would not be chargeable to the Great Lakes, then ? 

Mr. Williams. No; that would not be in the Great Lakes in any 
sense of the word. 

Mr. Scott. Each year he has confined his report more to tabula¬ 
tions than identifying them. 

Mr. Briggs. You are getting down now to tabulations instead of 
descriptions ? 

Mr. Scott. You will notice that in his first book that I read 
from, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1910, he has 387 pages, and 
in 1920, or the book I was just reading from, 1919, he has the same 
information contained in 42 pages, so he has been cutting it down 
and using his tables rather than identifying the particular wrecks. 

Mr. Briggs. Is that the effect of the Joint Committee on Print- 
me? 

Mr. Scott. I do not know; I would not be surprised. 

Then, as I told you, the next one is 1920, the sinking of the 
steamer Muskegon . 

Mr. Briggs. Which report are you reading from now; 1920? 

Mr. Scott. 1919 and 1920. 

Mr. Briggs. What date is that? 


AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’s ACT. 527 

Mr. Scott. That is October 28, 1919. The steamer Musheg on ran 
into the pier at Muskegon, and they lost 23 people. 

Then, on November 11 of the same year the John Owen , which 
was a freight vessel, foundered. 

Mr. Briggs. Were those vessels wood or steel? 

Mr. Scott. I do not know whether the Owen was a steel vessel or 
not. Someone said she was a steel vessel. 

While en route from Duluth, Minn., or Lake Superior, to Midland, 
Ontario, loaded with 100,000 bushels of grain, the steamer John 
Owen foundered and the entire crew, consisting of 22 persons, was 
lost. 

On November 22, 1919, the steamer Myron , while bound from 
Munising, which is in the upper peninsula on Lake Superior, with 
the barge Miztec in tow, both loaded with lumber, foundered 6 
miles west of Whitefish Point, on Lake Superior. Sixteen lives 
were lost in this accident. 

Mr. Gahn. Did the freight boats that went down, as far as you 
know, have 100 per cent life-saving equipment ? 

Mr. Scott. They had to have at that time. 

Mr. Briggs. Does it show the cause of their foundering, or just 
the conclusion? 

Mr. Scott. Well, when a boat founders she usually founders in 
nonsequence of a heavy sea. 

Mr. Briggs. I meant whether as the result of a collision or storm ? 

Mr. Scott. No; if it was a collision, it would be specifically stated, 
but these two ships evidently foundered on account of a very heavy 
sea. I do not know what those ships were. Evidently both those 
boats were wooden boats, because there are very few steel boats that 
carry lumber. 

Mr. Briggs, Were they both lumber boats? 

Mr. Scott. They were both lumber boats; yes. 

Those three accidents in 1919 atid 1920 account approximate^ for 
the 80 lives that were lost by wreck or foundering. 

Mr. Briggs. Have you any tonnage statistics with regard to the 
Lakes for the last 10 or 15 years? 

Mr. Scott. I am frank to say, Mr. Briggs, that when this proposi¬ 
tion came up I assumed that the gentlemen in the shipping game 
would have that information at their finger tips, and I have never 
talked to any of the witnesses who appeared before this committee 
in advance of their appearing or after their appearance. I have 
never discussed their proposition with them. They came in here and 
told their story without any suggestion from me, but I supposed they 
would have all this information. Now, when I find that is not avail¬ 
able in regard to the amount of tonnage in years past, I have now 
started and am now tabulating in my office the exact amount of ton¬ 
nage, based on the records of the Department of Commerce, and the 
total amount of freight and passenger tonnage from 1910 down to 
1920. I figured that five years before and five years after would 
fairly represent a basis upon which a reasonable determination could 
be made. I hope to have that information, and I will bring the 
records along with me so that they will be available. 

Mr. Briggs. I wish you would. 

Mr. Gahn. The bulk tonnage coming from and going through the 
Lake Superior region is over 100,000,000 a year, is it not ? 




528 AMENDING SECTIONS 2, 13, AND 14 OF THE SEAMEN’S ACT. 

Mr. Scott. During the Avar, before we lost a number of ships from 
the Great Lakes, that were taken off and transported to ocean traffic, 
coming through the St. Marys Canal, which is in my congressional 
district, we had approximately 110,000,000. 

Mr. Briggs. One hundred and ten million tons ? 

Mr. Scott. Yes. That is just prior to the Avar. Of course, you 
understand, that does not represent the actual carrying tonnage by 
any manner. 

Mr. Briggs. You mean at the time Ave Avent into the war? 

Mr. Scott. Yes; before Ave Avent in, the amount of tonnage that 
came into the canal. 

Mr. Briggs. You are referring to cargo tonnage. Will your figures 
show the distinction between cargo and ship registry tonnage? I 
notice very frequently in the Engineers’ reports they carry that dis¬ 
tinction. 

Mr. Scott. I am endeavoring to gh 7 e you exclusively freight ton¬ 
nage on the Great Lakes and the exclusively passenger tonnage and 
the net tonnage which might be classified as joint passenger and 
freight tonnage. 

Mr. Briggs. Not only that, but' ship tonnage as distinguished from 
the cargo tonnage. In other words, shoAV the amount of cargo that 
has been carried, and then the tonnage of the ships that have been 
actually engaged in carrying the cargo. 

(Whereupon the committee adjourned.) 


X 

LBD?4 






































